Happy Halloween

Tonight Husband & I are going to a Halloween engagement party. We have used two films as inspiration for our characters. And quite co-incidentally, the actors we are going as dated at one point. I will try & take some photos of us dressed up before we go out. I have been making Husband a cut-throat razor out of a wine box and working out how I can try and coax my long straight hair into an 80s poodle perm (I am blonde so I will have to be an amalgamation of the Heathers).

{Photos are the respective film posters
which I cannot remember where they were found...}

Peacock Feathers Find: Grannies, Inc

I came across this website last week & loved the idea of a team of Grannies knitting beanies for people who want handmade beanies but don't know how to knit. You can choose from either a pre-designed hat or you can pick and choose your own shape, style & colours. You submit, pay & one of their Grannies knits your hat for you.

{Image from Grannies Inc}

Hampstead Heath

Sometimes, just sometimes, a girl has to take the afternoon off and follow the autumnal sunlight to the most open space she knows. For the view. For the light. For the peace and quiet. Just sometimes, that day is Monday. And for this girl, that day was today.

The highest, lightest, open place I know (in London) is Hampstead Heath. So, in the company of a teaching friend who is on half-term this week, we went walking this afternoon. We walked in the orangey light of the late afternoon, across the grassy field full of people walking dogs, past the swimming lakes and up onto Parliament Hill. We walked side by side but in near silence, drinking in the light and the silence, broken only by the occasional chatter of tiny children and the barking of all the dogs being walked. We stood for a while looking over London and watching the sun creep lower in the sky before turning and returning to the village, the tube, home and, in my case, supper with Husband whilst watching the two final Masterchef programmes which aired whilst Husband was away.

{All images by me}

The Tower of London

Out of the gloom by the outer gate comes a pale, flickering light accompanied by the faintest jangling. A Yeoman Warder in his red jacket appears & disappears under a gate heading towards the White Tower, appearing again accompanied by 4 footmen. Together they march back to the furthest gate and begin the centuries old ritual of locking the Tower for the night. Doors locked, they march in formation back towards the Inner Ward down Water Lane, their footsteps echoing in the quiet night.

Suddenly the peace is broken by a shout: "holt" demands the Sentry posted by Traitor's Gate. "Who approaches?".

"Keys" comes the response? "Whose keys?" he demands. "Queen Elizabeth's keys" they reply.

And so they are allowed to pass towards the White Tower where the ceremony ends with a lone trumpeter playing the Last Post.

---

On Friday I went with the W.I to the Tower of London to witness the Ceremony of the Keys which is the ceremonial locking of the Tower which has happened daily since the 1200s and for a night tour of the Tower. It is a fascinating place built and evolved by many Kings of England and has housed some very famous prisoners (and executions). Two of Henry VIII's wives are buried in the church. Guy Fawkes was tortured at the Tower after being discovered at the Houses of Parliament. Even as late as the middle of last century the Kray Twins were held at the Tower for failing to report for national service.

It is also a beautiful reminder of old-fashioned London. I had never thought to visit but if you get the chance, I highly recommend it.

Welcome

My Wedding Graduate post is up on A Practical Wedding. Just wanted to say hello if you are dropping in from Meg's blog.

On freedom of speech & freedom of expression

I managed to get home in time to watch the last 50 minutes of Question Time on the BBC last night. It was an interesting programme to have watched, albeit in a slightly different format to usual. Admittedly I do not watch every episode of the programme but I have watched it enough times to know that usually a set of current affairs questions are asked to a panel by an audience.

As this is in the public domain and just in case it isn't abudantly clear from what I say, I will lay out my stance: I am not a supporter of the BNP. I am however a supporter of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. That is not to say I will always agree with what an individual has to say, nor that I won't draw inferences from what people say about themselves but I do think it is important that we have the right to freedom of speech and of expression.

I think the BBC were right to invite Nick Griffin, as leader of the BNP, onto a current affairs programme which gives other political parties a platform to speak. The BBC is not party affiliated and must be seen to be neutral. The BNP have achieved 2 seats in the European Parliament and were democratically elected to that position. What I do think the BBC should have done however was run Question Time in the usual fashion, i.e. the questions should have focused more heavily on this week's issues. I was expecting to hear discussion of the Royal Mail strikes, for example. Instead, the panellists and the audience, in my opinion, did themselves a disservice. They asked questions specifically about the BNP, attacked Nick Griffin personally and repeatedly, when what they should have been doing, in my opinion, was letting him dig his own hole. His views and his party's views are unpleasant, which is putting it mildly, but letting him come across as a victim, which he did, was in my view a mistake.

Of all the other panellists it was Bonnie Greer who impressed me the most. She was articulate when other panellists seemed unable to answer questions. I know she is not connected to a party, so she only had to represent her own views but it was clear to all that Great Britain needs more speakers like her, and less like Mr Griffin. The worrying thing is that the BNP seem to offer an alternative vote in towns and cities where anger at the mainstream political parties is rife and where education is less than satisfactory. We need to take note: I am able to watch Mr Griffin's statements and hear what is behind them, what he is covering up and know that he does not offer a viable solution, no matter what he says. But to some he will sound like his party offers them solutions which the other mainstream parties do not. Surveys have shown that people who are not racist are voting for the BNP. Parties do not get elected to the European Parliament when only a few fundamentalists vote for them. The BBC has drawn all eyes to the policies of the BNP: what is needed now is a realistic solution to win those votes back again.

Question Time did briefly touch on another issue that was topical this week, both in that it was current and because it also reflects on the very reason that Mr Griffin was invited by the BBC. The question was related to the Jan Moir article in the Daily Mail which reflected on the death of Boyzone member Stephen Gately and drew the conclusion that because Mr Gately died and because he was also gay, the fact he was gay must have caused or contributed to his death. It was a hugely distasteful, homophobic article and prompted thousands of complaints to the PCC. I disagreed with everything that Ms Moir wrote but I have to conclude that if we wish to live in a democratic society where freedom of speech is so fundamentally important, we have to allow people like Ms Moir the right to publish articles such as the one she did. We can say that she is wrong in her views but I would rather live in a society where newspapers and television channels are not restricted by the government.

It was this type of question in which Mr Griffin did himself disservice: in answering it he also came across as homophobic and ill informed. He did his party no credit by his response. Yet there was no personal attack on him so he did not sound the victim either. If only the other questions put to the panel last night had been in similar neutral terms. In answering this question the other panellists also demonstrated why the BBC was right to have invited Mr Griffin onto the programme in the first place: our country is a democratic one which prides itself on freedom of speech and each person's ability to draw from that their own conclusions. One hopes that everyone reading Ms Moir's article would have seen it for the homophobic rant that it was and that everyone watching Mr Griffin's stint as a Question Time panellist would have seen what he truly represented. But if they didn't, that is their choice. And one which we are entitled to have.

On being married part II

I wrote before about being married but re-reading it, I'm not sure I agree with my July self any longer. On paper, not much has changed since then. I am still jobless although I have taken on some unpaid freelance work in PR which I am enjoying. I am still at home more than Husband. I am still, technically, a housewife, in that Husband works and I do not. Yet I do not feel that I am one, or need to be one. It is also (I hope, I pray) a temporary role.

Meg wrote the other day about reclaiming the word 'wife'. I think there is a lot of merit in stating that wife does not have to be defined in a Bree Van Der Kamp pre-catering-business type way. As you will no doubt have realised by now, my viewpoint usually leans towards the traditional but not, surprisingly, on the subject of the word 'wife'.

In our marriage, Husband and I are a partnership, a team, a family. Neither of us is in charge. We make decisions about our future together, jointly. Sometimes one person's agenda is more important (like when I had a job offer out of London) and sometimes the other person's needs take precedence. We share our household chores equally to our strengths: Husband loves to cook, I love to bake. We both sit down on a Monday night and order our vegetables and meat from Able & Cole, we purchase our own lunches and as he cooks (and earns the money at the moment, he purchases other food items on the way home from work. I purchase cleaning materials & toiletries, because I care which ones we use and he has little preference). Husband would rather wash up and I would rather do laundry. We have floor boards so we have yet to have the hoovering discussion but I suspect we would take turns. We both do tidying and emptying bins and cleaning generally as and when it needs doing. He encourages me to be nicer, I encourage him to come home a bit earlier from a night out. We support each other, look after each other when we are ill & try and get the other person to have the first shower in the morning so we can steal 5 more minutes in bed.

Home is where my Husband is. Home isn't my parents house any longer. I like that. I love being his wife, perhaps because it makes me smile every time he says it. I love that we have said to each other, in front of everyone else, that we are each others forever. I love that he is proud of that commitment, the fact that he is not single any longer and likes to proclaim it to friends, colleagues and clients. I also love the fact that when we were away on our honeymoon, his out of office e-mail told everyone that he was on our honeymoon, rather than just on annual leave.

I am his wife. He is my husband. But we are also so much more than that. We are a family.

But, pretty much all of this applied even before we got married. We were a family long before we got married, even if not officially, legally. We waited until we got married to open a joint bank account but since living together our finances have been intertwined. Generally, the person with the money spent it. Our habits, our sharing, our supporting were present long before any thoughts of marriage. Perhaps that was how we knew we would have a good marriage: that we had the basis without any formal commitment in the forms of rings or signatures. Which is why I am not traditional about the word 'wife': because wife to me simply says Rachel in the context of married Rachel and M. Nothing more.