Monday, September 3, 2007

Milky chai with the godfather of Nepal - Nesta Quin

Over a pot of milky chai tea in a breezy café in the Nepalese capital, your globetrotting pseudscorner correspondent was fortunate enough to have a chat with current Nepalese coach and Sri Lankan cricketing legend Roy Dias before his celebratory dinner party at the Royal palace. The portly Dias had just returned from his fourth straight victorious U/19 Asian Cricket Council Championships and the ever-present well wishers in this crowded dilapidated dusty city are all keen to show their appreciation by continually interrupting our conversation.

I met Mr Dias, who has rightly earned the title of The Godfather of Nepal, at the recent semi-final between Nepal and Malaysia and the pleasure has been all mine. A gentleman in every aspect, I cringed when he told me of an interview he did with the BBC after his first ACC Championships six years ago. He was patronisingly asked, “How do they even play cricket in Nepal, aren’t there hills everywhere?”. He then told me that this “poorly educated Englishman” was supposedly serious. “I guess he’s never seen the incline at Lords” was my reply and Roy’s deep chuckle echoed onto the busy street outside at the mere mention of the vagaries at the international home of cricket.

Roy has been asked about yesterday’s final against Afghanistan continuously - won by Nepal in a tight low-scoring match - so I switched the conversation to his playing career and particularly his one and only match at the famous ground. It was the first Test match in England between the MCC and Sri Lanka and Roy conveyed that the then inexperienced Lankan squad were “nervous and excited” about the prospect of playing a Test at Lords.

“It was a wonderful occasion and I’ll never forget the standing ovation we received from the crowd after our captain Duleep Mendis twice turned down offers of bad light on the first afternoon.” I asked if the English skipper did likewise and Mr. Dias just smiled and raised an eyebrow. He told of how “Mr Gower” sent the Sri Lankans in after winning the toss and how nobody, including their own supporters, gave them a chance even though England had failed to win any of their previous dozen Tests.

His eyes sparkled as he reminisced of how the then minnows “declared close to 500” and how they cleaned up England for “around 350”. The match was drawn but it was the game that “signalled the arrival of Sri Lankan cricket to the world”.

“Everyone was very proud” but it still took another 17 years (2002) before England would engage Sri Lanka in anything more than one-off Tests at home. This “snub” still rankles the elder generation of Sri Lankan cricketers. They had played multiple Test series against every elite nation by 1989 and why England “were afraid of them” is “not understandable” I piped in something about England’s tour of Australia and recent World Cup performances being “of minnow-like proportions” and Roy’s hearty belly laugh once again resonated throughout the neighbourhood.

After some more well-wishers and a dozen autographs Roy settled back in his ornate wooden chair and mused about the future prospects for cricket in Nepal. He relayed plans to build a high-altitude Academy with help from the ICC and others. Many Asian athletes train in Nepal and Roy thinks that cricketers could also benefit from working on their fitness and skills at altitude.

He spoke at length about elite cricket being played “90 percent with head and heart” and how it is this aspect of the game where the Nepalese lads really excel. “What distinguishes Nepal is that they never give up and keep fighting with a passion to the very end. Gurkha spirit, underdog spirit, call it what you will. While other teams in the region may find it hard to summon the necessary desire and self-belief for whatever reason, to a man, the Nepalese cricketers have what it takes.”

He spoke passionately about the demographics of Nepal and stated that 40% of the population were aged under 15. He said that in his six successful years as coach that he had “barely scratched the surface” in terms of the talent available. He emphasized this point by sharing the little known fact that the U/15 ACC winning championship team only had two lads that had played in a competitive match and yet they won the regional tournament undefeated. With only “15 turf wickets” in the entire country and most of them situated in the south close to the border with India, The Godfather of Nepalese cricket is eyeing the rugged north of the country as a vital untapped resource that needs investment so that Nepal can take the next step up on the international ladder. Roy was deadly earnest when he said that he “would like to take hold of those boys who think nothing of going up and down mountains for miles to get their milk”. When facilities are available to these lads he assures me “that Nepal cricket would even be stronger”.

He then went on and used his home island as an example, “The Sri Lankan national team made some major improvement once they started recruiting from the outstations. That’s where they find the fast bowlers. They don’t need gym or strength work. It’s all natural.” I had Roy’s head nodding and his belly bubbling once again when I mused, “Well if you are scaling a mountain and wrestling a yak before breakfast mate, bowling 20 overs into the breeze should be as easy as sipping chai”.

After winning his fourth straight undefeated Asian U/19 Championship only 36 hours ago Coach Dias was understandably a busy man. He drained his cup and with a warm handshake and friendly smile he wished me well and quickly blended into the seething mass of humanity on Kathmandu’s sunset lit city streets. It was a pleasure to share half an hour with this remarkable living legend and once again I was reminded of the marvellous camaraderie and cultural respect that the game of cricket can create amongst it’s participants. Something, I am afraid to say, that mere spectators of this grandest of games seldom learn nor appreciate. Namaste.

80 comments:

Zephirine said...

I quite enjoyed this article when I first read it over on The Googly (http://www.thegoogly.com/the_thunder_downunder/index.html), but I do come to Pseuds expecting to find new original material, not pieces already published on a commercial blog site.

Pseuds' contributions have been few and far between lately, it being the holiday season, and that's absolutely fine, we all have lives after all. But I hope that won't become a reason for this site just reproducing work that's already appeared elsewhere.

Personally, I prefer to read articles where the authors have taken the trouble to write something specially for Pseudscorner, even if at some times of the year there are very few of them.

nesta said...

Point taken zeph but you should know that everything I have given to pseuds for free has been reproduced elsewhere for reward.

My motivation for posting here is completely alruistic. Not everyone that reads pseuds reads other sites and magazines where I am published. It is purely for others enjoyment/annoyance.

It was pseuds that was the catalyst for the extra cash I earn writing about cricket and I post a few of them here to express my gratitude. Not only for the opportunity to be published but I am thankful for critical comments from other writers.

I'd like to hear from the other readers/writers at this site about this issue.

Should I only give articles to pseuds that are totally exclusive?
And if so, why?

There is an article I have written for Australian Cricket Magazine that is published next month in the T20 WC special edition. I was going to stick that up here after the mag hits the stands.

I am now reticent. Should I share or should I not?

Make a coment and I will follow whatever democratic direction is given.

Zephirine said...

Nesta, there are obvious copyright questions but don't let's go into that. I do think this is an important issue and I hope other Pseuds will comment on it.

Historically, Pseudscorner came out of the Big Blogger competition and provided a home for articles which were written with passion and enthusiasm but which were not going to see the light of day anywhere else. I suppose I've assumed that all Pseuds have carried on contributing in the same spirit.

Personally (though it isn't likely to happen as I don't write professionally about sports) I wouldn't post anything on Pseuds that was intended for paid publication elsewhere, still less a piece that had already been published elsewhere. Everything I've put on the site has been written for the Pseudscorner community.

But perhaps others don't agree, and perhaps the general feeling is that it doesn't matter?

nesta said...

Obvious Copyright questions? I own my own words. I won't go into it because you are assuming knowledge of my agreements with others. A word of advice. Don't assume, it is unwise and leads to misunderstandings.

I am aware of your thoughts Zeph. You don't want anything on pseuds that isn't written exclusively for pseuds.

Simple and understood. If that's the consensus I am happy to abide.

All seems a bit fascist to this generous rebel but if you wish to censor and restrict my input it's fine with me.

Zephirine said...

I'm in no position to censor or restrict anyone on this blog, Nesta, as you well know this is Ebren's blog and we're here because of his willingness to give up his time and effort.

Just stating my opinion.

nesta said...

Zeph - You may have no control over the mechanics of this blog but you took the time to state your objection and that in itself is a method to influence it's direction.

You are opening a Pandora's Box. I sincerely hope you are aware of that.

I'm interested in your reaction when you discover that pieces at The Salon - not authored by me - have been published elsewhere before they arrived at your site.

You assume that this article was not written with pseuds in mind when in fact it was.

That I crafted it in a manner so I could retrieve a financial benefit elsewhere is unimportant. What is important is that it is shared and given freely with a loving heart without obligation.

I'm pleased you enjoyed it and it doesn't matter if it is published on every website on Earth, it is still original.

They are my words, thoughts and experiences and mine alone. Nothing can change that. I'd think it would be a basic human right to share them with whomever I choose.

There is an undercurrent of elitism in many of your thoughts Zeph. I won't elaborate for I do not wish to embarrass you and it is plain for most to see.

Considering that this site was where my writing journey began I was intending to always post appropriate stuff here and especially when it appeared idle.

It is my way of keeping the pseudscorner embers burning.

bluedaddy said...

I haven't read the article yet, so apologies for that Nesta. Obviously its content is not relevant to the discussion above.

My take is that there is no need for exclusivity. Time is way too short to be penning articles for Pseuds alone, especially if a crust has to be earned. I think it would be good manners to indicate that a piece has been aired elsewhere. As a one off contributor to Pseuds thus far, I am especially appreciative of every contribution, even the ones I dont get to read.

But I feel that content will be the lifeblood, not its exclusivity.

I also think you two could maybe touch gloves here. The argument is a valid one, as are your relative positions. No reason not to have the discussion, but there has been an element of reading between the lines. That always leads to trouble online.

Best to all,

BD

Zephirine said...

I really don't want to get into a personal argument here and I'm not going to respond to personal attacks.

I'm used to a writing environment where once you've delivered a piece of work to one place and been paid for it, that's where it stays and you can't, contractually, take it elsewhere.
Obviously that has formed my attitude, other Pseuds may see things quite differently.

The Other Stuff blog which I run (I once referred to it as the Salon for a joke, but it's not a name I like) contains only original work as far as I know.

As I said, just stating my opinion. I'm not going to make any further comments on this thread.

duncan said...

Blimey, as I haven't written more than a couple of things for Pseuds, I really feel as if this isn't my call. But...

Some sites definitely don't want articles that have been published elsewhere. I write on arts/culture for brainwashed and popmatters (both for no financial reward) and both insist that submissions are not available elsewhere.

Brainwashed is run by a guy who has shone a light on more obscure releases for more than 10 years and he values it's originality quite fiercely. Popmatters actually makes writers sign some kind of agreement that I of course didn't read before signing!

So, since that's what i am used to -- and not to kop out here -- it wouldn't concern me if Ebren ultimately dictates the rules of the site that he maintains. How else to effectively decide?

In this particular case, there is a link up to The Googly isn't there, so is Ebren, in a sense, refering us to Nesta's article twice?

On a cricket note, I watched the dvd Wondrous Oblivion last night. Quite enjoyed it....

Bests,
d23

file said...

Namaste Nesta,

really interesting, insightful piece, really well written as always and not surprisingly worth a few bob

to me it's a good thing that it's here, I don't spend much time playing with Googly's and so I wouldn't have seen it

Pseuds certainly benefits from personal experience pieces of any standard and this is a nice slice of Nesta as well as Dias (as well as an insight into the game)

I wonder how the Googly editor would respond if he knew you were posting your pieces here as well, you may well retain copyright Nesta but that may not give you incontestable rights to post/sell again the pieces they've bought to competitors for example (not sure how Pseuds fits into that as a sort of semi-pro/pro-celebrity thang)

not that i could personally give a flying f'ack about Googly's rights tho obviously none of us would want to give further headaches to Ebren

me, I don't have a problem with the posting of recycled articles but that doesn't mean to say there aren't problems with it

I really enjoy reading your work and art here Nesta tho to be honest I wouldn't want a situation where all/most of the work here was other folks sloppy seconds!

I agree with Zeph that one of the great things about PC, besides the freshness of the pieces, is that they are for and from pseuds, that said, may we all make millions from the growth we achieve here

you may not be aware that Zeph has fought this corner with other Pseuds and it's clearly her considered opinion

Zeph is not 'elitist' in any negative way and just because you'n'er had a bit of a contretemps over baggy green knickers, is no reason for this discussion to resort to adjectives

it's great that we're talking about it though, I for one would be interested to know the actual position over the IP of your words, whether Googly could make a problem for you or Ebren or not

and regardless of all that, thanks for a great read Nesta

gg said...

I was happy to read this article on here, just as I've been happy to read everything else by Nesta.

Then I saw Zeph's comments, and thought "I don't have the time to comment now; I'll get back to it".

I've been grateful when Nesta has led us to his writings on other sites, but haven't made a habit of visiting them. I'd be happy if he put every word he wrote on here.

Maybe that's what all of us should do - just post all we have on sport, as long as copyright issues don't scupper us. We can always write "First published in the Rawtenstall Recorder" or summat.

There's been a drift across to GU of late, and I've been a part of it. I don't mind if GU prospers, but I really do want Pseuds' Corner to prosper. Thus we need as wide a range of quality articles on here as possible - exclusive or not - from our fellow-pseuds.

And we need new pseuds, too!

P.S. Old pseuds who have ceased being regulars in the taproom can no longer expect "special treatment" from Ingrid (nudge, nudge) if they show their faces. Furthermore, there may not be room for them on the charabang to Southport for the annual outing.

nesta said...

This piece was in the archive at The Googly when it was posted here.

I posted this article in particular because I thought it may entertain the non-cricketing pseuds readers. The ones that never Googly like I never football.

As a free man I resist any restrictions on my expression. I come from a musical and scientific background and everything once complete is shared. The results of my work are for any and all to ponder over.

You don't write a song and only play it once on one radio station. Why would you love and sweat over a piece of work and only air it the one time. It makes no sense.

As for hypothetical problems with my friends at The googly and elsewhere that is between me and them and has nothing to with Ebren. The posting of this piece is my responsibility and no-one elses.

So stop scaring the poor bloke for doing us all a favour.

And File - After all the great pieces you've given us in the last few months I should be thanking you.

Last thing before I depart for a couple of days.

As I've said pseuds is the primary reason that I now write elsewhere. I am grateful to each and every one of you including the long lost kilt who was the first stranger I encountered.

It is essentially a writing community. We communicate through words and share in the joy and humility of sport.

I want to honour that by sharing what I consider my best most relevant stuff here for as long as the site or I remain.

I expect nothing in return other than cryptic in-jokes, phrases in French that must be eaten by Babelfish and for the topic to be completely ignored.

Where else can you find such an eclectic and punctually perfect bunch of sports nuts?

Carry on. Talk amongst yourselves. PLease do not speculate on the ownership of my work. It is disturbing seeing my contractual agreements aired without knowledge. It's all so tabloid.

I'll be back on Wednesday. Be good.

MotM said...

I will be forever indebted to Pseuds for the support and confidence they gave me. The fact that people took time to read and then comment on my submissions with such wit and thought has, and this is no exaggeration, transformed an important part of my life. After so many years of passive consumption of writing, I now prefer to do it!

I take Zeph's point (and were an article that appeared in a national newspaper appear at pseuds, I would support it fully) but on balance I'm with Nesta.

I had read this before at The Googly (interest alert, I write there too) but wondered how it would be received here by a (largely) different audience, compared to the cricket buffs over there. I suggest that my momentary pause as I thought, "I've read that before" is well worth the comments that are likely to follow. This wouldn't work for ANY of my Googly pieces as they are straight cricket, but Nesta's range over themes and issues much broader than that.

I hope Nesta will post his magazine article here partly because I want to read it and partly because I want to read the comments too. And I hope he will continue to post more stuff here if he believes that pseuds readers will be interested. I trust his and Ebren's judgement.

IPR? I don't know enough about the legal position and I don't know anyone who does.

guitougoal said...

Zeph, Nesta,
Personally I think both of you should sign a conpyrights agreement with me. As an Internationally renowed love letters collector, I found your above exchange the most ardent, witty, clever for my inspiring collection.I would love to publish them on my new blog "The heartbreak corner", with a picture of your beautiful faces....naturally grateful acknowledgement will be mentioned for your permission-
COLONEL PARKER.

nesta said...

Colonel Gui,

Where do I sign? My mates don't call me the Heartbreaker because the ticker's dicky.

My only contractual stipulation is that we post the love letters at Pseuds as well as Readers Digest and Playboy.

You can keep the cash if you can use your tremendous influence so I can spend a weekend with Hugh and the bunnies.

Have we got a deal?

Ebren said...

I can't post things I write at work here. I've been doing a bit of footy finance recently and taken some quality abuse from morons with some support from friends and enemies as well (google "james andrews premier league wages" and you'll find some of it). But my office has always owned anything I produce while at work. What I write in my own time is my own.

Don't know how it works with freelancers. I would be annoyed if my freelancers (the ones I pay – or rather work pays) posted stuff we have paid them for elsewhere as it weakens google rankings. But then whether I could do anything about it would be down to the contract, in Nesta's case I couldn't possibly comment.

We did once have an article that came to me at pseuds and then went into a national newspaper (well the independent) a couple of days later – I didn't print it on the instruction of the author.

But overall, this site was started because I wanted to read what you lot had written about sport.

That still stands.

I will publish anything that I find interesting or think others would find interesting (within a few legal limits), and I'm not going to trawl the net to find out if it has appeared anywhere before.

I might even start writing again when I get some free time back.

colonel parker said...

Nesta,
play boy, play boy, love letters of all time, i'll keep the cash!...deal.
Frida Kahlo's words to Diego Rivera "my fingerstips touch your blood",are nothing compared to the Zephirine to Nesta-"we have a copyrights question"..
this style can be described as a cross between surrealism and contempo-blogospheric-it's priceless,
the contract is in the mail if only i could have a photo of both of you kissing each other, we'll make the front cover.

DoctorShoot said...

Folks
I am of the view that it's really great to see quality writing here, and I think the peice Nesta posted is quality and does deserve the additional audience as long as the Googly gurus are not too discombobulated by sharing the search enging ranking with little old Pseuds (who give Googly a free top of the page direct link)...

It might even encourage more readers to go across to googly if they like the quality, and then discover the value of other works by mimitig, trumpet, lee etc...

I agree with GG that a rider saying this was published somewhere else first should be a courtesy.

then it's on the shoulders of the author surely regarding whatever copyright issues there are, as long as Ebren is comfortable with it.

I must confess to myself that I have posted stuff, first written for Pseuds, onto two other blogsites to see if other audience may chance across my little flowers... and that anything I write for Pseuds is likely to be earlier work rehashed and added to etc...

so whilst I am an ardent devotee of wise owl Zephie, in this case I am with Nesta'seing able to post the best of his best
here to share if legally permissible.

I have already told Nesta elsewhere that I like this piece very much for it's tone and working class approach to a little known aspect of a magnificent world game. On the other hand I felt that the weaving in of plaudits in relation to your own jokes is perhaps too much syrup on the pudding.

crikey I do go on sometimes....

leeroycal said...

I wasn't going to enter into this debate, but The Googly has been mentioned far too much for me not to, and as its editor I feel I have to share my thoughts.

Firstly, the issue of copyright. I am breaking no confidences with Nesta when I say that freelance writers in general own their own work as they have not entered a contract of employment, unless there is a specific freelance charter that all writers sign up to at a particular publication. The Googly does not have that with anyone and Nesta is perfectly free to use his work elsewhere.

Regarding repostings. A couple of my pieces appeared on The Googly first, my comment piece about Steve Harmison and my pithy piece about Chris Schofield. I see this place as something quite beautiful in that everyone is able to share their work, wherever it came from, for free and I hope that continues/

I am glad that he does the fair thing of waiting for his pieces to go into The Googly's archive before he shares elsewhere.

tony said...

I really enjoyed this nesta: an interesting aspect of a sport I (sorry, everyone) only enjoy in very small doses. Good to see an interview, too (first time I can remember one here).

As to the controversy, I've never thought about it before. To be honest, it doesn't bother me, although maybe it'd be better to link some pieces... Hm, not sure. I'll think some more.

Ebren said...

Quick comment boys and girls and whatever offside is (I can never tell in that wig, kilt, with a cocktail in hand - and being French just muddies the waters so much more).

Play nice.

Zeph and Nesta get a little heated up at the top of the thread and Nesta accuses Zeph of elitism.

There is strong stuff on both sides, but that was directly personal.

Now while elitism is the fundamental pre-requisite for much professional sport I don't think he meant it nicely here.

Play the ball not the man people.

guitougoal said...

objection, "being french muddies the water"
-that's may be true but this kind of deductive rationality has a racial stereotype attached and doesn't fit with your reasonable proposition:
to play the ball-

Ebren said...

fair point Mr ugoal. However, I am English and allowances must therefore be made for my a) xenophoiba, b) ignorance, and c) persistent attempts at irony.

guitougoal said...

your point is well taken Sir, same here about point c.

offsideintahiti said...

"Quand on parle du loup, on en voit la queue." (Proverbe Tibétain)

Guitou, don't mind Ebren, the whole thing comes from that time when he offered me a snog, and was probably thinking I would hot-bloodedly refuse and be gallically offended, but then I told him I was game and he's been confused ever since. Resolution of that matter will have to wait until we meet in the flesh, and we can find out exactly how "muddled" he is. In other words, if you want to get personal, you know where to find me.

Which rather conveniently, if somewhat long-windedly, brings me to the point I wanted to make about getting personal. Now, I know Zeph is of legal drinking age (her being a taproom regular and all) and, as such, is well able to fight her own corner, but in this particular case I'd like to step in anyway. Elitism? Fascism?? Fascism??!!??

We understandably get very touchy when it comes to our writing, but this is going a bit far. Zeph, in her first couple of posts, is merely stating her opinion and asking for everyone else's. And I utterly fail to see any hint of fascism in that. Why wouldn't we all be able to make SUGGESTIONS about the way Pseuds' Corner is going? In fact, it reminds me of the time Mouth posted a collection of photographs on cycling, and one Nesta commented (quite opinionatedly, if that's a word at all) that he felt Pseuds' Corner was a place for writing and not an art gallery. Nothing wrong with that, a civilised discussion ensued, points were made, opinions expressed and no one was called names. I think the point Zeph raised is perfectly valid and should be debated without resorting to personal slurs.

About the issue itself, I don't feel that strongly about it. I do like the idea that Pseud's Corner is all original stuff written for FREE (pour l'amour du sport, so to speak). But then again, I won't refuse to read a piece just because it's appeared somewhere else before. I suppose I feel the same as for Mouth's photographic essay: once in a while is absolutely fine, not so good if it turns into a trend.

And I'd love to hear Andrew's take on this. Actually, I'd love to hear from Andrew, period.

gg said...

We love sport on here - and we love words.

We should take care not to rob words of their meaning. The meaning of "fascist" is fairly clear, and there are people still alive with very painful memories of fascism.

I don't agree with Zeph, but I see nothing that reeks of fascism in her arguments.

Tabloid? Elitist? I won't discuss those accusations. I believe Zeph can cope with them, but "fascist" is well below the water line.

P.S. Nesta - I'm not suggesting that you accused Zeph of actually being a fascist.

Ebren said...

No one accused Zeph of fascism. It's a dangerous word that gets people very wound up, but no one was accused of it. And I want to make that clear.

The line was: "If that's the consensus I am happy to abide. All seems a bit fascist to this generous rebel but if you wish to censor and restrict my input it's fine with me."

This is not an accusation; it's an opinion on a proposed change to blogging rules. If we're going to get angry or heated lets make it about what was actually said and not what we think we said – or at very least about toast or whose round it is.

gg said...

Ebren,

I hope that I don't appear to be angry or heated: I'm not.

I think that my "P.S. Nesta - I'm not suggesting that you accused Zeph of actually being a fascist." is quite clear.

I sincerely hope that I haven't clouded the issue: I was trying to achieve the exact opposite of that.

Ebren said...

Sorry GG - I was not having a go at you. It was a general warning. I've had people on GU blow up in my face in the past when I have used the "f" word - even though I accused no one of it.

So I may be a tad over-sensitive. Especially about toast and beer.

tony said...

Maybe we're witnessing a little post-holiday blues here. Personally, I try never to use the f word as I feel it's almost never used correctly and is, as Ebren says, so emotionally loaded.

BTW, Ebren, I know it's a bit cheeky on someone else's piece, but is there any chance of giving Florrie back her missing lines?

file said...

Nesta: "There is an undercurrent of elitism in many of your thoughts Zeph. I won't elaborate for I do not wish to embarrass you and it is plain for most to see."

Nesta is welcome to his opinion but I'd like to clarify that when he says that this "is plain for most to see" he speaks as if he is privvy to the consensus of opinion here on pseuds

I'd like to make it clear that

a) this most definitely does not reflect my opinion

b) I resent Nesta presuming to represent me

I wonder what evidence he has to support such a claim or whether he is deliberately trying to hurt people and stir up trouble

what do other pseuds think about Nesta representing them in this way and/or his motivations for doing so?

that's a direct question...

tony said...

Thanks, Ebren!

Maybe we need a little moratorium here. I think I've seen some oversensitivity, some attempts to backtrack and some overreaction. It all sounds too personal for me to get involved in.

nesta said...

I've returned and I see some of you have become very tired and emotional. Big night in the tapromm, was it?

Considering this is meant to be a place for writers I'm amazed that so few have understood my words.

I called no-one a fascist or an elitist. Read it again. Describing an opinion/argument and quite fairly to, as having an undercurrent of elitism is not calling anyone names. It's talking about the meaning of the words written.

As file points out the phrase, 'it is plain for all to see' was a step too far. But it is plain for me to see.

And File I would never represent you or anyone else and I think you know that and are drawing a very long bow in that assumption.

Omitting content because it isn't written solely and specifically for pseuds by a pseud sounds elitist to me. The dictionary agrees. I'm reasonably confident others without emotional attachment would too.

And the meaning of fascist where I come from is oppressive. My mob were sensible enough to never embrace it on a continental scale so it has no history or connotation attached.

In a global society of course sensitvities need to be respected but I think it might be time some of you developed a thicker skin.

It is a choice to be offended. You can just as easily not be offended. Think about it.

Some of you were very quick to jump to conclusions. And that is disappointing considering I was the one giving.

Also, I regret to inform that one mischievious pseud sent me emails that were exchanged between Zeph and others yesterday. Fascinating and most illuminating. Even in cyberspace politics is a dirty game. I prefer cricket it is much more civilised and honourable.

Thankyou to everyone who read the article. I was hoping to share my experiences of Nepal and some anecdotes about France and cricket that I have discovered. The thread went scurrilously off-topic immediately.

Looks like I'll have to go to the beer garden with my old mate the flying kilt and compare registered sporrans instead.

gg said...

Nesta -

yes, words can mean different things in different contexts.

If we were having a liquid game of pool, and I played safe and you said "Hey, GG, don't come the fascist!", then I wouldn't flinch.

In writing, and in this context, I flinched - since one of the oppressive tools of fascism is censorship, and you yourself wrote
"...if you wish to censor...".

At the risk of repeating myself, I would like to read anything you care to post in future - regardless
of whether or not it has been printed somewhere else.

Your writings show a rare warmth, humour and generosity.

guitougoal said...

File,
I thought that was a little bit of "storm in a tea cup" and seems to have been resolved.Now it seems someone is stirring up mud.
Nesta,
the "mischievous blogger"..if there is someone playing this vicious game among us , it should be our biggest concern.Bigger than the difference of opinion between Zeph and yourself- This is more disgusting than playing politics, in all fairness you should provide us with the evidences-

gg said...

guitou -

I've had two e-mails concerning this matter.

One was from Zeph, inviting comments - nothing untoward about that. I made a comment on here.

The other was from another person, suggesting that Nesta had been over the top in his replies to Zeph, and that I should take a second look.

I took a second look: the result is on here.

bluedaddy said...

Without wanting to further overegg a pretty soggy quiche, I think we may have ourselves a defining moment here.

As TonyE sensibly said, we may have a collective/selective case of post hol blues. I am finding it hard to get back into any kind of groove. Work entirely sucks. More to the point, so far I've seen half of one Match of the Day this football season, and the occasional Youtube clip. The cricket is passing me by entirely, and worst of all, I missed a HannibalBrooks vs Barry BeeGee Glendenning ruck on GU. I love those.

I am reading through Pseuds backlist but am a bit too busy living life. I even remembered my wedding anniversary today (but did forget which day the kids were going back to school).

As I stated earlier, I thought our two initial protagonists should have acknowledged the legitimacy of each other's positions after the discussion drifted towards presumption and misunderstanding, or at least asked for clarification. I still think it would be a good idea.

Although I dont blame Zeph for feeling hurt after Nesta took a more combative line than was really needed, I am not keen on even a heated argument being permanently exited. Zeph I would prefer you stay engaged with the subject you raised, or engage in what is now apparently a new subject.

Spats like this should remind us that we do have something to lose here. Pseuds lives or dies by its content, and by the mutual respect and understanding of its participants. Zeph and Nesta are both key contributors here, and everything I've read from them suggests two thoughtful, articulate human beings. If feelings have been hurt or hackles raised, please try to see that in a storm like this (teacup-based or not) only clearly expressed thought, and respectful discourse is going to keep the ship afloat.

If needed I'll dredge up my local boozer analogy once more, but suffice to say that many a mickle makes a muckle.

love BD

bluedaddy said...

PS re emails and the like. Zeph's initial alert to contribute to the subject of Pseuds originality is entirely legitimate. Everything else is a bit naughty. Let's talk openly or not at all.

gg said...

BD -

yes, a defining moment.

Wise words!

Perhaps we even needed this storm, in the way that relationships sometimes do: to remind us of how precious this community is.

guitougoal said...

Bluedaddy,
Bravo. I couldn't agree more with your comments-
On the other hand I still can't explain your allegiance to a dysfunctional football club :)
gg,
thanks, hopefully we are back to square one.If Zeph didn't feel the love soon she'll be overwhelmed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWy9q24wfdU

offsideintahiti said...

This bluedaddy fellow really gets on my nerves. Whatever the situation, he always finds the right words, angle, and degree of emotional detachment.

Me? I have no intention of developing a thicker skin. I'm perfectly happy with the one I have. It's really soft, warm to the touch, suntanned to perfection. It drives the ladies (and one media magnate) crazy, dogs spontaneously nuzzle up to me, it sparkles beautifully when I come out of the lagoon and the sun catches it the right way.

Unfortunately, given the nature of this medium, you'll just have to take my word for it. Words are all we have here, and so we must choose them carefully.

Nesta, if you feel you were misunderstood, you're entitled to question the perceptive powers of your audience, but you may equally wonder if you could have put your point across better. The f- word did rile me, and was definitely too strong for the occasion. Elitism, I can live with, and I can understand it (if not necessarily agree with it) when you apply it to Zeph's suggestion of yesterday. But when you write "There is an undercurrent of elitism in many of your thoughts", it did sound to me as if you were applying it to Zeph's general contribution to this site and to her character. I simply disagree with that, and thought the general tone of your reaction was disproportionately aggressive. I may have misunderstood you, but there was room for misunderstanding.

The good news is there is no shortage of space for clarification, and no shortage of goodwill among pseuds, at least not on my part. I don't think "leaving" is a good solution, simply because everybody loses out. I still miss Andrew's presence here. I hope he'll come back when he is ready, and I hope no one leaves as a result of this.

The funny thing is that it seems most pseuds actually agree with you, Nesta, in terms of publishing stuff here that appeared elsewhere. I am very glad that you are able to make money out of your writing, and very happy that Pseuds' Corner was a factor in this. It also had a very positive impact on my life, and I hope it will continue to develop and thrive. And for that to happen, it needs everyone.

I'm confident we can make it work.

Zephirine said...

BD, I have great respect for you as a wise and sensible adult, despite your inability to remember the dates of school terms. Guitou knows from past experience on the threads that a well-chosen George Harrison song will usually melt my heart. Combined with the vision of Offside emerging from the lagoon, well, what’s a girl to do? Between you, you’ve persuaded me that I should at least make one further appearance here.

I take your point about staying around to make my case, BD, but I have found that the best way to deal with personal attacks on a blog is to leave the thread at once and have nothing more to do with the person responsible. I still feel that the tone and content of Nestaquin’s comments to me constituted a personal attack, and I would like to point out, calmly, that he has retracted only one phrase and has vigorously reiterated his right to say all the rest. Having said that, it is clearly time to move on.

Regarding emails, I have nothing to hide. At the beginning of this thread discussion, I sent an email to all the 17 regular Pseuds contributors whose addresses I have. Realising that I had taken quite a strong line about the re-using of material, I wanted other members of the community to make their views known, and sent this email, which I’ll reproduce here for anyone who didn’t see it:

Hi Pseuds,

On Pseudscorner at the moment, a point has been raised which I feel is important and it would be great if some of you could add your views.

Nestaquin has contributed a piece which has previously been published (and presumably paid for) on The Googly. My feeling is that Pseuds should be for new original work only, and I've said this.

I don't mind debating the point with Nesta, but I can't speak for everybody. It may be that other Pseuds think it simply doesn't matter and that writers can post something they've written regardless of whether or not they've already sold it elsewhere. It does seem to me important that we should discuss it and get a concensus.

What do you think? Please don't answer this email - put your views on the thread!

all best,

Zeph


I assume that this was sent on to Nesta by somebody, which is fine by me. I would have copied it to him myself but it didn’t seem necessary as he knew what the discussion was anyway. (btw, I do know how to spell consensus)

I sent a similar email to another Pseud who has some expertise in contracts and rights, when I got his address. I don’t regard this as any sort of political manoeuvring. It was just an attempt to get other Pseuds involved in the debate.

My initial guess was right, because the comments have shown that most Pseuds are not as worried about this whole question as I was. I still believe that Pseudscorner should be a place for writers to bring new work which has not been sold elsewhere, but I’m happy to go along with the views of the majority and there has been a good discussion about it.

The difficulties between myself and Nestaquin remain unresolved, and I have been seriously considering whether or not to continue as a Pseud. But the last thing I want is for other Pseuds’ time to be taken up with internal arguments and factions when there are far more important things to discuss, such as India’s stunning last-moment victory in today’s ODI.

marcela said...

gg says:
"Old pseuds who have ceased being regulars in the taproom can no longer expect "special treatment" from Ingrid (nudge, nudge) if they show their faces. Furthermore, there may not be room for them on the charabang to Southport for the annual outing."

tut, tut.
well, frankly. as if. and then. if you want to me get rid of me you will not manage so easily. i'm on that charabang all the way to the moorea convention, matey.

storm in a teacup, defining moment, hb v bg, GU or pseud's pseud's...

original writing, new writing, exclusive rights, comment on thread, comment on e-mail...

busy living life, bluedaddy you say? tell me about it.

on the issue of whether the writing should be new and just for pseud's i honestly believe that's not important. the whole big blogger rejects thing was by definition to create a site to publish what was clearly written for elsewhere. my only contribution to pseud's so far has been a feature killed by another magazine. i understand some of doctor shoot and file's stuff has been written centuries ago and kept dustgathering and locked in oak vaults where fine grapes are also being fermented... and very good thing too that it emerges here, me thinks.

in fact. i have toyed with the idea - and i think even suggested to another contributor - of posting on pseuds' original copy which may have apeared published elsewhere BUT heavily subbed... aahhh. what says thee?

in fact. i think pseuds' is a very interesting organic place where experiment and trial and error will define as much as laying down clear rules.

some time ago, when the issue of whether pictures and photographs should be posted here arose, i refrained from commenting for no particular reason but thought that OF COURSE they should.

as indeed video and sound archive.

the combination of all the sources, of all the authors, the shared authorship and the organic editing process... surely that's one of the most exciting things about the blogosphere and the very concept of blogging.

we all really go for the youtube links a lot, on the threads. I am of the opinion that pseuds' should experiment more with the use of other media directly, and not just through youtube.

i am also of the opinion that the thread and the original posting should not be subject to different rules. if it's ok to post a comment linking to something else, an image, a sound, a recipe, another piece of writing... why should the original article need to be new and exclusive writing just for pseuds'?

we need more pseud's? then we must link more to pseud's on other sites. we must encourage people to read pseuds' by e-mailing. we must encourage the yrsa's and the pasta gobbler's and the honolulu's and the emma's who pop in often enough, and not become too embroiled in internal dynamics - let's face it, all communities have these.

where, pray, is kokomo's granfather's user friendly drug room when we really need it?

on the much, much tricker subject of the e-mail circle in a circle... well. i agree, i only recieved one e-mail from zeph asking for posts on this thread (which everyone has done) and one reply which is also posted here in its entirety.

seems pretty transparent and above board. i often e-mail a comment to someone if i want them to read it and am not sure they are still following a thread.

peace to all.

marcela said...

oh, dam.

i spent so long on my little diatribe that i missed the last few comments.

zeph, consider leaving all you like. but don't. please. for the love of dog.

i'll find some george harrison clips for you :)

(or you can come and listen to my vinyl anytime you like...)

tony said...

Zeph - I'd like to echo Marcela in this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dhPYHe88_Q
and this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j63wx4UATJU

guitougoal said...

zeph.
it's getting personal again,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qv_0HEuO2A4

guitougoal said...

still personal but in french
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFWs5kWP-us

next we have file on his knees singing: Volver in Thai, we don't need that do we?

Zephirine said...

Guitou, tu veux me faire pleurer? Enough already.

Seriously guys, I'm going away from this thread again now, I'll play my youtube links and think about life.

I'll leave you with this, which has no meaning attached at all, except that it's fun.

tony said...

Guitou - loved the second clip - one of my favourites - but the music on the first???

another... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0TEa-Aa4sU

el toreador said...

no. no per favor.........volver
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_NODJbKyZ4

tony said...

That's beautiful 'toreador', La Pene should leave Hollywood and come back to Spain pero ¡ya!

guitougoal said...

Tony,
can't open this link, could you come again? I generally know we like the same stuff-
on one line es mejor....

gg said...

Marcela,

you're DRIVING the charabang: first Blackpool Illuminations, then Moorea.

tony said...

works for me, guitou. Still, try this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeY-8F1qsZs

guitougoal said...

Tony,
that's it! perfect for the circumstances, all we need now is GG doing his special.....
-"and the next step is love"

offsideintahiti said...

Sould have spotted the taproom potential of this thread earlier. When it starts with a brawl, it's usually a good sign.

And so, in a spirit of conciliation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2e4NlnLr28

gg, if marcela is driving, do you mind if I sit this one out?

gg said...

offy,

by all means sit it out on the trip TO Moorea.

I'm just working on the Tahiti screenplay, and it looks like Marcela will go AWOL over there - probably hitching up with a pakalolo farmer - so you'll be driving back.

I know you wouldn't dream of missing the Blackpool Illuminations
two years on the trot.

I think you would be advised to start learning how to sing "Roll Up for the Mystery Tour..." and say "It's turned out nice again" and "Kiss me quick, squeeze me slow".

tony said...

Morning offside. I was rather hoping the taproom would move to the chiringuito next door (over here the brawl comes at the end of the night). Still, in the same spirit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HXh_cXBMjU

Anonymous said...

I'll just have a glass of brawl and be off to bed.

'night, all!

gg said...

Anonymous?

Me - anonymous?

Strong stuff, that brawl!

offsideintahiti said...

gg,

I know no place on earth can compete with Blackpool, but here's a taste of what to expect at the Moorea convention:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HXh_cXBMjU

(With traditional Tahitian music)

tony said...

Nice clip offside. Hope you enjoyed mine...

offsideintahiti said...

Which one, Tony, the Animals? Yes, very appropriate. What's on the menu at your bodega next door?

guitougoal said...

your Tahiti convention travel agent:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlPgkaq2xmw
entertainment will be provided with food and drinks.

tony said...

guitou - love it!!!

Offside - I suppose you've just got up: what I meant is that you re-posted mine. Next door I'm offering 'agua de Valencia' along with a dish I've just invented...

tahiti convention travel agent said...

I do have credentials:
my last convention was a hit!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uA9KplYT-dk

offsideintahiti said...

Tony,

have I? Which one? You got me all confused now. Maybe I should just cancel today and go back to bed...

tony said...

No, offside, it's a lovely day. Have a carajillo and then compare your 'youtube' link to mine...

offsideintahiti said...

tony,

you've posted about six thousands of them. Which one?

tony said...

Sacre bleu! offside, my last and yours...:

me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HXh_cXBMjU

you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HXh_cXBMjU
I don't mind - just wanted to know which gem you were offering.

BTW - Think I'll cancel the agua de Valencia...

offsideintahiti said...

tony,

are you trying to mess with mi cabeza? I never posted the Animals, you did.

I posted this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2e4NlnLr28

tony said...

offside - tu es tres mechant, or however you frogs say it. You only have to compare your posts to mine. I don't mean your first utube but your second. ¿O me estás gaslighteando?

offsideintahiti said...

tony,

je suis pas méchant, juste pas réveillé. In other words, Oooops. Got my copy/paste all wrong, sorry.

what I meant to post was this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHA005AH2Gg

I've also popped in next door, for that badly needed shot of aguardiente, and something to eat.

byebyebadman said...

Hmmm. I haven't had time to post on here until now but I did reply to an e-mail from Zeph yesterday...not trying to be duplicitous and happy to post it here if my token views on this matter are sought, but literally did not have the time during what was quite a hectic day.

However, it is disappointing to see it escalate the way it has...to paraphrase Muhammad Ali, I ain't got no quarrel with them Pseuds. I hope you any differences can be reconciled. And in that spirit...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zsAXUuJR7J0

bluedaddy said...

Marcela, hello girl. There has oft been a moment recently when I have felt your absence in cybershire. Today was one of them. Amen to your little diatribe.

Zeph, dont stray too far for too long. I really, really enjoy your contributions. Duckworth and Lewis will forever remind me of you now (Fucking hell, I hope that was one of yours -my memory is truly shot to shreds nowadays).

GG, Blackpool illuminations - Jesus now you've said that I'm just going to have to take the kids this year. Who neeeds the real Aurora Borealis when you've got trams with coloured bulbs on?

Nesta, I largely agree with you regarding your right to do what you will with your words, but I do feel that you bristled unnecessarily and did some assuming (or some interpretation) of Zeph's comments today yourself. She raised a valid point, sought clarification, and seems taken aback by your response. Your 'big night in the taproom' comment struck me as too defensive, despite most Pseuds seeing your point of view as perfectly reasonable.

Happy to debate this further - but tomorrow

xx BD

thirstydog said...

in the ghetto,
what's wrong with this version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmVFnhO3A98
Tony,
with all due respect for your youtuberlator talents and great taste
Marcela's Bob Dylan version top your Animals one sorry....

pipita said...

Bluedad

May I ask when exactly was your wedding anniversary, and how many years of that where you celebrating, cause I had my fifteenth one on the third of this month. Didn't forget about my girls's school obligations thought:)))Peace everyone

bluedaddy said...

Hi Pipita. Got hitched nine years ago yesterday (5th) though have been together much longer. It was a fantastic day.

pipita said...

Pleased to hear that Bluedad. We went out for sushi monday night. Nothing very flash or glam but very nice also.

Lawrencewica said...

There are several good Melbourne removalists moving service companies you might want to check with. This increase of heat even in stand-by, will increase your power bill a little bit. The separators hold electrolyte and prevent shoring between the positive and negative plates. A battery health monitor is a pretty handy tool for keeping track of your battery health, lifespan and your own personal habits. While buyers are buying Notebook power pack the vendors can assure to them how many hours that Notebook power pack may last, there are many causes that are promote to the malfunction of the Notebook Battery pack.

Tweet it, digg it