Omar Khayyam and the Secret of Life

The secret of life is only known to a handful of happy souls who live on Mount Olympus, and gaze down on the rest of us mere mortals. Socrates. Diogenes the Cynic. Lao Tzu. Buddha. Montaigne. Spinoza. These happy few, these band of brothers. What do they feel, when they look at the rest of us losers and no-hopers, striving in vain to attain the heights of wisdom that they have reached? Do they feel contempt? I doubt it . Pity and compassion? Perhaps occasionally. Indifference? Much of the time. But most of all I would say they are amused by us and our foolish antics.

One such demi-god, one who belongs to the elect group of those who know the secret of life, is the Muslim poet Omar Khayyam, who lived in Persia from 1048-1131 AD. The below fragments of his poetry are taken from Peter Avery’s superb contemporary translation. I would ignore the Edward Fitzgerald translation:

They say lovers and drunkards go to hell,
A controversial dictum not easy to accept:
If the lover and drunkard are for hell,
Tomorrow Paradise will be empty.

What of your entering and leaving the world?
A fly appeared, and disappeared.
Many like you come and many go,
Snatch your share before you are snatched away.

Drink wine, you will lie long enough under the ground,
Without companion, friend or comrade.
Take care you tell no one this hidden secret,
‘No lily that withers will bloom again’.

Drink wine, this is life eternal,
This, all that youth will give you:
It is the season for wine, roses and friends drinking together.
Be happy for this moment – it is all life is.

Though you may have lain with a mistress all your life,
Tasted the sweets of the world all your life;
Still the end of the affair will be your departure –
It was a dream that you dreamed all your life.

My rule of life is to drink and be merry,
To be free from belief and unbelief is my religion:
I asked the Bride of Destiny her bride-price,
“Your joyous heart” she said.

I need a jug of wine and a book of poetry,
Half a loaf for a bite to eat,
Then you and I, seated in a deserted spot,
Will have more wealth than a Sultan’s realm.

Rise up my love and solve our problem by your beauty,
Bring a jug of wine to clear our heart
So that we may drink together
Before wine-jugs are made of our clay.

The year’s caravan goes by swiftly,
Seize the cheerful moment:
Why sorrow, child, over tomorrow’s grief for friends?
Bring out the cup – the night passes.

If we don’t clap hands together as one,
We cannot tread down sorrow with our feet in joy:
Let us go and be happy before the breath of dawn –
Many a day will break when we breathe no more.

When the drunken nightingale found his way into the garden
He discovered the face of the rose and the wine-cup laughing;
He came to whisper in my ear excitedly,
“Seek out these, life once gone cannot be sought again”.

Most Played Songs on My iTunes over the Last Year

I really have to bite the bullet here, and just come out with the truth, no matter how embarrassing. I wonder is there anyone out there who could do this honestly and not feel a little mortified about one or two of the songs that crop up? Anyway, here, in reverse order, are the twelve most played songs on my iTunes from last year. If you want to find out about the latest cutting edge music, er, you’re in the wrong place. But doing this is a revealing exercise. It’s a good way of finding out what music you really like, as opposed to what music you think you really like. I’m sure the below list reveals something about who I am. But what?

12. Wish You Were Here – Wyclef Jean

11. Crazy In Love – Beyonce

10. Mr Brightside - Killers

9. You Make it Easy – Air

8. Today – Smashing Pumpkins

7. Last Night – The Strokes

6. Paradise by the Dashboard Light - Meatloaf

5. There is a Light that Never Goes Out – The Smiths

4. At the River – Groove Armada

3. Nancy Boy – Placebo

2. Somewhere Only We Know – Keane (Sweet Jesus! This really is the second most listened to song on my iTunes! The evidence is there. There is no way to deny it. How is it possible that I have listened to this song more than, say, a masterwork like Meatloaf's “Paradise by the Dashboard Light”?)

1. Just Like Heaven – The Cure

Book of the Year – The Bible

This long-awaited book did not disappoint. It’s got it all. Genocide. Incest. Torture. Tempestuous homosexual love-affairs. People coming back from the dead. Whatever it is you are into, you’ll find it somewhere in here. Not suitable for children though.

I thought that the first part of the Bible was the best. At the beginning of the second part of the book (called “The New Testament”) I felt the writer took a wrong turn, and presented us with a plot line so implausible it makes Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings” look like a masterpiece of verisimilitude. And the lead character in this part of the book is such a loathsomely prissy goody two shoes that I find it impossible to believe he will hold much appeal for the general public.

So yeah. The Bible. A mixed bag. If you liked “Harry Potter” then you’ll love this. Definitely worth a look.

My Year in Film

Avatar. James Cameron’s 3rd extravaganza. I felt like I was there! On Pandora in the Alpha Centauri star system! Looking for unobtanium! Avatar is even better than Titanic. And who would have thought that was possible? *[please see end of this post for acknowledgements]

The Men Who Stare at Goats. I went to see this because I wanted to see the latest Coen Brothers film. But, as Coen Brothers films go, I thought this one was disappointing and not up to their usual standards at all. And that’s because “The Men Who Stare At Goats” is not a Coen Brothers film. It’s by someone else. But I thought it was the Coen Brother’s latest film. I call that false advertising on the part of the people who were promoting this film. Except nobody advertised it as a Coen Brothers film. Anyway, it wasn’t until the film was over that I learned that this film has no connection whatsoever with the Coen Brothers. What else can I say about it? George Clooney is in it. It’s the worst film of the year. It’s about how crazy American right-wingers are – about how nuts they are. Well, we all know that already. We don’t need a film to tell us that American right-wingers are deluded and detached from reality.

Inglourious Basterds . The first scene is Tarantino at his best. Brilliant tension as the Gestapo dude interrogates the French guy. The rest of it is puerile, standard Tarantino fare.

Gran Torino – At this stage, Clint Eastwood is proving himself to be one of the great directors. This is the latest in a string of wonderful films from the world’s favourite tough guy.

Precious – I found this film deeply moving. And I haven’t even seen it. That’s how deeply, nay profoundly, moving this film is – you don’t even have to have seen it in order to be deeply moved by it. Incredible.

Film of the Year: It’s Complicated. In a mediocre year for films, “It’s Complicated” stood out as an instant classic. Three legendary actors at the top of the their game. And as for Meryl Streep. What can we say? Is there any role this woman cannot play? Such versatility! The film is laugh out loud funny. You could tell the audience was really enjoying it. I don’t understand why the reviews were so lacklustre.

Other Film of the Year. Looking for Eric. Britain’s greatest film director, Ken Loach, hits another bull's eye with this stunning portrayal of a troubled postman with an obsession with Eric Cantona. Really quite marvellous.

[* Acknowledgement: I would like to thank Michael Treacy for drawing my attention to the "unobtanium" cinematic trope and for trying to explain to me what a "cinematic trope" is, while drunk]

What is Genius?

A READER WRITES: “I am at a loss as to how you managed to exclude Rome from your list of Ten Best Cities!!! Is there an as yet unmentioned reason for this? Or did you just simply forget?”

BB SAYS: Yes, the Eternal City belongs on the list of course. Largely because it is home to the world’s greatest painting. Painting is visual philosophy, and Raphael’s Stanza della segnatura is philosophical genius of the highest order. The painting is a room in the Vatican. The four walls of the room are painted with frescoes by Raphael.

The paintings on the two largest walls face each other across the room as equals – on one wall the School of Athens (pictured above); on the other wall the Disputation of the Holy Sacrament. The School of Athens represents Philosophy, the Disputation represents Religion. The former contains paintings of great figures from the pagan Greek era, the latter contains great figures from the Christian era. So here, Reason and Faith face each other as equally valid ways of life – Raphael suggests that the choice between philosophy and religion, between reason and revelation, is the most important one that a human being needs to face.

This is a Renaissance painting. What does that mean? The Renaissance was the moment that existed between the Middle Ages (i.e. the great age of Christianity) and the Enlightenment period that followed it (i.e. the Age of Reason). The Renaissance was the moment between these two eras when religion and reason faced each other as equally valid choices. Raphael’s Stanza della segnatura is the graphical representation of that moment – the moment when Renaissance humanists conceived of a harmony between the teachings of Greek philosophy and Christian theology.

At the centre of the School of Athens are the two greatest philosophers of Ancient Greece, Plato and Aristotle. This-worldly Aristotle, the proponent of the Golden Mean, extends his hand in a balanced, moderate fashion. Other-worldly Plato, the idealist, points his arm to the skies and towards eternity. On the lower level of the painting there are representations of scientific figures such as Pythagoras and Euclid. On the higher level are philosophers – such as Socrates, who is painted in conversation with a group of youths. There is also a portrait of the great Muslim philosopher Averroes, a controversial figure who was suspected of being an atheist. So here, at the very heart of institutional Christianity, at the centre of the Vatican, Raphael has painted a portrait of a man who was heretic, who was either a Muslim or an atheist.

To the right, hidden amongst all these figures in the School of Athens is a self-portrait of Raphael himself. The message could not be clearer – Raphael is saying: “I am a philosopher. I belong with the Ancient Greeks - and maybe even with Averroes”.

The Disputation, which represents religion and faith, is also divided into a higher and lower section, although here the division is more definite. At the centre of the higher level we have the Holy Trinity (the father, the son and the holy ghost), surrounded by the Virgin Mary, angels and biblical figures such as Moses. On the lower level are popes and theologians such as Augustine and Aquinas, discussing the meaning of the Eucharist. So even here, discussion and philosophical disputation are present.

What about the other two smaller walls of the room that join the School of Athens to the Disputation? One is devoted to poets and the muses, and the other to law and political virtue. Raphael suggests that art and politics mediate between reason and revelation, between philosophy and religion. The depictions of the poets include Homer (the greatest poet of the pagan Greek era) and Dante (the greatest poet of the Christian era). Art and music (including Raphael’s art) are the means by which harmony can be achieved between Reason and Faith. The fourth wall contains a representation of the four Greek Cardinal virtues – Moderation, Courage, Justice and Wisdom. Again, these practical virtues mediate between Reason and Religion. Later, Christians added three cardinal Theological virtues to the four cardinal Philosophical virtues - those Theological virtues are Faith, Hope and Charity - making a total of seven Cardinal Virtues.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Woody Allen’s latest film is about two American women, Vicky (Rebecca Hall) and Cristina (Scarlett Johansson), who spend a summer in Barcelona. Many of the film’s themes were previously discussed on this blog.

Vicky is moderate, practical, conventional, cautious and she has definite ideas about what she wants from life and relationships. She has bourgeois tendencies. Her husband-to-be is back in America.

In contrast to Vicky, Cristina is passionate, a dreamer, adventurous, impetuous, artistic, unconventional and is not sure what she wants from life and relationships. She knows what she does not want, but she only has the vaguest ideas of what she wants. She has Bohemian tendencies.

In Barcelona the two women fall in with a local artist, Juan Antonio Gonzalo (Javier Bardem), who tries to seduce them both. Vicky naturally dislikes him, but eventually she sleeps with Juan, discovering that she is not as conventional or cautious as she first supposed. She has erotic longings that she has been trying to suppress. Her impeccably bourgeois fiancé then arrives in Barcelona – and she finds herself terribly bored with him, and falling for the exciting Juan.

Cristina also sleeps with Juan, ends up living with him and having a relationship with him. In a nice twist, the artist’s ex-wife shows up (amusingly played by Penelope Cruz) – she is even crazier than her ex-husband – hard-drinking, moody, hysterical, manipulative, suicidal, chain-smoking, she has previously tried to kill Juan, she is generally nuts. In the end, she seduces Vicky and her ex-husband, and the three of them get involved in a love triangle. Eventually, Cristina discovers that she is not as Bohemian as she thought she was, and that the arrangement does not satisfy her.

At the end of the summer, the Vicky and Cristina go back to the US, and nothing has really changed for them. Vicky is now married to her dreary husband, and Cristina still does not know what she wants from life or relationships. Vicky’s husband is an extreme version of Vicky (practical, conventional etc.) and Juan and his ex-wife are extreme versions of Cristina (passionate, unconventional etc.) The two women represent an attempt to find the Golden Mean between these two extremes, but they fail. The message of the film is: there is no solution to the problem of love, or indeed to the problem of life (where people have to try and find a Golden Mean between being bourgeois and being bohemian). However, unlike Allen’s previous films about the hopelessness of love, such as Husbands and Wives, this film is not bleak or depressing, but manages to remain cheerful throughout. It’s as if Allen is saying: “Yeah, love and life are a pretty hopeless business but let’s not get too depressed about it or anything”.

A Platonic Interpretation of the Wizard of Oz

Great works of art are also great works of philosophy, because they teach us what it is to be a human being. In my opinion, films are the most innovative and dynamic art-form of our time. The Wizard of Oz is an astonishing film – like all great works of art it's inexhaustible.

The scarecrow, the tin man and the lion represent Plato's tripartite division of the soul into reason, desire and courage. The scarecrow wants a brain, the tin-man wants a heart, and the lion wants courage. Now, becoming a complete human being requires getting the balance right between Plato's three divisions of the soul. The irony, of course, is that these three characters already have within themselves the things they are looking for – you can't think about having a brain unless you already have a brain; you can't desire to have a heart unless you already have a heart; you can't feel shame at your cowardice unless you already have within yourself the courage to overcome that cowardice. These three characters do not realise this truth until they receive three trinkets from the conman Wizard. All of this is a very clever commentary on the fact that humans need Myths, illusions, dreams in order to find the Truth – those Myths are the fuel which power us on our journey towards Self-knowledge and Wisdom. That is why Plato uses myths and metaphors in his own dialogues.

The Wicked Witch represents the Evil and Ignorance which thwart us on our journey towards wisdom, and which must be conquered (killed) if we are to achieve Self-knowledge. Dorothy must kill the Witch in order to "become who she is" – just as we all must kill the ghosts that haunt us, or else spend our lives running away from the imaginary fears that control our lives. The other characters are archetypes who accompany Dorothy on her quest to "become who she is".

Dorothy needed to leave home in order to find herself. Having done so, she could return home again, this time as a free woman. The film analyses the tension in the human soul between home and away. The deep yearning to escape home (“somewhere over the rainbow”) but also the yearning to go home again once one is away (“there’s no place like home”). Recall that in Plato's parable of the cave, once people leave the cave and see the sun (i.e. see the truth and attain philosophical liberation) they still need to return to the cave and live there.

Here are some quotes:

Auntie Em: “Find yourself a place where there isn't any trouble!”
Dorothy: “Some place where there isn't any trouble. Do you suppose there is such a place, Toto? There must be. It's not a place you can get to by a boat or a train. It's far, far away. Behind the moon, beyond the rain.”

Scarecrow: “I haven't got a brain... only straw.”
Dorothy: “How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?”
Scarecrow: “I don't know... But some people without brains do an awful lot of talking... don't they?”
Dorothy: “Yes, I guess you're right.”

Coroner: [singing] “As Coroner I must aver, I thoroughly examined her and she's not only merely dead, she's really most sincerely dead.”

Wizard of Oz: “Do not arouse the wrath of the great and powerful Oz. I said come back tomorrow. You people should consider yourselves lucky that I'm granting you an audience tomorrow instead of 20 years from now … pay no attention to that man behind the curtain [speaking in a booming voice into microphone] I am the great and powerful... [then, realizing that it is useless to continue his masquerade, moves away from microphone, speaks in a normal voice] Wizard of Oz ... Wizard of Oz.”

Wizard of Oz: “As for you, my galvanized friend, you want a heart. You don't know how lucky you are not to have one. Hearts will never be practical until they can be made unbreakable.”
Tin Woodsman: “But I still want one.”
Tin Woodsman: [when saying goodbye to Dorothy] “Now I know I have a heart, because it's breaking.”

Tin Woodsman: “What have you learned, Dorothy?”
Dorothy: “Well, I - I think that it - it wasn't enough to just want to see Uncle Henry and Auntie Em - and it's that - if I ever go looking for my heart's desire again, I won't look any further than my own back yard. Because if it isn't there, I never really lost it to begin with! Is that right?”

Do YOU have a problem? Leave an anonymous comment, or send your problem in confidence to brianbarrington@gmail.com

Shakespeare STILL not a minor English poet

A READER WRITES: “I see you still insist on describing Shakespeare as a minor English poet. I can assure you that you are amusing no one but yourself with this nonsense. If you continue with this abomination, you will lose me as a reader. Yours etc.”

Do YOU have a problem? Leave an anonymous comment, or send your problem in confidence to brianbarrington@gmail.com

Paris Hilton Reads This Blog!

Paris Hilton is possibly the world’s most famous celebrity. I caught up with her in her L.A. mansion where we discussed fame, relationships, Ambrose Bierce and her deep love of this blog.

BRIAN: Hi Paris. You’re incredibly well-known. Why do you think people find you so fascinating?
PARIS HILTON: Beats the hell out of me! I’m as mystified by the circus as anyone.
BRIAN: [laughs] So just how famous are you?
PARIS HILTON: Really, really famous. For years, my name has been one of the most common entries into Internet search engines. If you talk about me on your web page, you are guaranteed more hits. The more you mention the name of Paris Hilton on your web page, the more referrals you will get from search engines.
BRIAN: Really? So if I type your name into my blog over and over again like this: Paris Hilton Paris Hilton Paris Hilton Paris Hilton Paris Hilton Paris Hilton Paris Hilton Paris Hilton Paris Hilton – it will increase my readership?
PARIS HILTON: Guaranteed! But I’m sure you would never resort to such underhand tactics merely to try and get more hits …
BRIAN: [nervous laughter] No, no, of course not. So are you seeing anyone at the moment?
PARIS HILTON: Oh you know yourself Brian, I have a few things on the go. Nothing too serious.
BRIAN: Have you read any good books recently?
PARIS HILTON: Yes. I’ve been reading a the Devil’s Dictionary by Ambrose Bierce.
BRIAN: Wow! That sounds a bit … well … high-brow for someone like you. Are you trying to counter your image as a air-head blonde?
PARIS HILTON: God no! I make a good living carefully cultivating my image as an air-head blonde. It would be madness to try and get rid of that.
BRIAN: I see. Does it ever bother you that people think that you’re dumb?
PARIS HILTON: If people think I am so dumb, then why are they so interested in every aspect of my life? I ask you Brian, who are the really dumb people here? [gives me big wink].
BRIAN: [laughs] So what do you make of Bierce?
PARIS HILTON: In the pantheon of great American writers, I place him behind only Twain and Emerson. Consider the following definitions from his dictionary:

• Abstainer, n: a weak man who yields to the temptation of denying himself a pleasure.

• Absurdity, n: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.

• Admiration, n: Our polite recognition of another's resemblance to ourselves.

• Egotist, n: A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me.

• Amnesty, n. The state's magnanimity to those offenders whom it would be too expensive to punish.

• Happiness, n: an agreeable sensation arising from contemplating the misery of another.

• Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - I think that I think, therefore I think that I am.

• Deliberation, n.: The act of examining one's bread to determine which side it is buttered on.

• Famous, adj: Conspicuously miserable

• Friendless, adj: Having no favors to bestow. Destitute of fortune. Addicted to utterance of truth and common sense

• Future, n:That period of time in which our affairs prosper, our friends are true and our happiness is assured.

• Impartial - unable to perceive any promise of personal advantage from espousing either side of a controversy.

• Mad, adj. Affected with a high degree of intellectual independence.

• Patience, n - a minor form of despair disguised as a virtue.

BRIAN: Wow! As a amateur philosopher, I have to admire Bierce’s wit and insight.
PARIS HILTON: Yes. Well I really admire your blog too. I read it every day.
BRIAN: [looking chuffed] Oh it’s just a little hobby of mine. Nothing too serious.
PARIS HILTON: No, no. I find your blog keeps me grounded. There’s something in it for everybody. It works on so many levels.
BRIAN: [blushing] Gee … Thanks Paris.
PARIS HILTON: I have to go now. Some of my female celebrity friends are in the hot-tub around the back of the house. Would you like to join us for a while?
BRIAN: It's a non-starter - I'm married.
PARIS HILTON: Oh come on!
BRIAN: [shuffling uneasily] Erm … perhaps I should just go. I’ve been reading one of Plato’s later dialogues, a really complex one, and I feel I should be getting back to it.
PARIS HILTON: Ok so, those Platonic Dialogues aren’t going to read themselves! Maybe you could join us for just a minute? Some of my friends need sun-lotion rubbed into them. You could do it.
BRIAN: [hesitates for a second before the words of a minor English poet come rushing into his mind –

"Poor soul, the centre of my sinful earth,
Rebuke these rebel powers that thee array;
Why dost thou pine within and suffer dearth,
Painting thy outward walls so costly gay?
Why so large cost, having so short a lease,
Dost thou upon thy fading mansion spend?
Shall worms, inheritors of this excess,
Eat up thy charge? is this thy body's end?
Then soul, live thou upon thy servant's loss,
And let that pine to aggravate thy store;
Buy terms divine in selling hours of dross;
Within be fed, without be rich no more:
So shalt thou feed on Death, that feeds on men,
And Death once dead, there's no more dying then".

Sorry Paris but I really have to go.

PARIS HILTON: Ok so. All the best
[Interview Ends]

Comic Geeks

Are they art? Dunno, but I read a few of them recently. If anyone has any suggestions of good ones then let me know. Here are the ones I enjoyed:

• Shortcomings – Adrian Tomine. Guy worries about the size of a certain part of his anatomy while trying to find his way amongst bi-sexual Californian slackers. Side-splitting. Really liked it a lot.

• A Contract with God - Will Eisner. Epic tales set in New York. A cut above the rest. All his stuff is brilliant.

• Asterix in Britain, Asterix in Belgium - Goscinny and Uderzo. French classics. Set in the time of Caesar.

• Preacher – Garth Ennis. Violence, cowboys, vampires, crazy plot lines. Total escapism. Great fun altogether.

• Akira - Katsuhiro Ōtomo. Post-apocalyptic Tokyo. Gripping sequential art.

Have also read:

- Palestine – Joe Sacco. Guy from Malta walks around the Palestinian Territories and records what he sees. Heavy going at times, but good.
- Jimmy Corrigan, the Smartest Kid on Earth - Chris Ware. Clever stuff, although I’m still not one hundred percent sure about it.
- It’s a Good Life if You Don’t Weaken – Seth. A beautiful object, but I draw the line at a comic about a guy who is obsessed with collecting comics.
- Watchmen – Alan Moore. Quite clever for a superhero story.
- Sandman – Neil Gaiman. Good stories, but all that fantasy doesn’t really do it for me especially.

How To Talk About Books You Haven’t Read

A READER WRITES: “I recommend that Chris reads 'How To Talk About Books You Haven’t Read' by Pierre Bayard. I thought it was a great book.

BB SAYS: Yes, that’s a good little read, and it addresses many of the issues that Chris raises in his post, such as why people pretend to like books that they do not really like, and why they pretend to have read books that they have not really read. Pierre Bayard is a French academic who teaches literature at universities for a living. He gives lectures on Proust, even though he says he has only ever skimmed through In Search of Lost Time. He says he frequently pontificates about Joyce’s Ulysses, even though he has never read it. He says that not having read a book is not necessarily any reason not to talk about it or not to have an opinion about it.

As a general rule, we can divide human beings into those who read too little and those who read too much. Often we don’t give due consideration to the problem of reading too much. The philosopher Schopenhauer once said that reading can frequently become a substitute for thinking. Reading can also damage your imagination and creativity – how many great writers from history have PhDs in Literature? A scholar has been defined as: someone who gets paid to read the books that are too boring for the rest of us to read. In general, I try to follow Flaubert’s advice: read in order to live.

(Confession to my readers: I have not actually read How To Talk About Books You Haven’t Read by Pierre Bayard, but readers will note how this did not prevent me from discussing it knowledgeably and intelligently).

“Is Gwyneth Paltrow Human?”

A READER WRITES: "I subscribe to Gwyneth Paltrow's GOOP mails. They really annoy me because she really annoys me, but out of curiosity and the hope that some day she'll seem less like an alien I keep letting them fly into my inbox. Today's one was all these people saying what their favourite books were. She said and I agree that 'The best way to escape (not to mention the least expensive, most hassle-free way) is to curl up by the fire with an amazing, transportive novel.'

She then ruins it all with this gem 'This week I have asked a couple of my best and most literary-minded girlfriends to share their top picks. These are the women who read voraciously and with passion. No TV for them before bed (I need a little something, even 10 minutes of "The X Factor" or a forensic pathology documentary, just something, for Lord's sake!).'

As if aliens really watch x factor. She's all 'I'm human, honest!!'

I don't believe for a second that these are these people's actual favourite books, but rather the books that they hope will lead people to draw the conclusions about them that they want them to. Do you agree?

I am trying to read more, and would like you to recommend a lovely story to me and in return here's my suggestion, it's the last book I read that I loved and was so sad to finish, Middlesex by Jeffrey Eugenides. I know it's been out ages but I was put off because I thought it was about the place in England. It's not.

In summary – book recommendations please. Thanks. Chris"

BB SAYS: You are quite correct. When people provide lists of their “books of the year” or “what I am reading” it is nearly always an attempt to create an impression about themselves: “Look at all these high-brow books I am reading! Look how intelligent I am!”.

But, as you can see from this site, I repeatedly name-drop heavy-weight intellectuals in order to try and make myself appear more cultured than I actually am. So I am not the person to ask about this. However, I really enjoyed Cormac McCarthy’s “The Road”.

If any other reader has suggestions of good reads, or good stories, nothing too pretentious, for Chris, then please put them in the comments section.

Do YOU have a problem? Leave an anonymous comment, or send your problem in confidence to brianbarrington@gmail.com

Addicted to Big Brother

A READER WRITES: “i love watching celebrity big brother. does this make me a total dick? I saw the extras christmas special and vowed to never watch it again but it's like a vortex I can't resist hurling myself into. the guilt eats me up every day. when vern leapt into michelles arms and she spun him around my heart leapt! what should i do? what would you do brian barrington?”

BB SAYS: I once knew a woman who used to record the live feed of Big Brother during the night, so that she could watch what had happened the next day! She watched it for hours and hours every day. That was addiction. My impression is that you are not addicted. If you are just watching it for an hour every evening for a couple of weeks, in order to get you through a dark and miserable January, then that is not a major problem.

According to the philosopher Roger Scruton, vicarious experiences (i.e. experiences that are felt or enjoyed through imagined participation in the experience of others) are the enemy of life, the enemy of living a full life. Our media saturated society offers copious opportunities for vicarious experiences and escapism. Examples of vicarious experiences might include: playing computer games; watching professional sports; reading Mills and Boon novels; consuming pornography; reading celebrity magazines; reading superhero comics. These activities offer an escape from real life.

Personally, I think Scruton is being a bit harsh. In moderation vicarious experiences are fine – they can be a good way to relax, especially when life is getting us down. It is when vicarious experiences become excessive, when they start to substitute for real experiences, that you need to be careful that they are not becoming a replacement for the more rewarding, challenging and fulfilling activities that can make you grow as a person.

ART VERSUS FANTASY:

Works of art are, in one sense, also vicarious. But rather than bringing us into a fantasy world, true works of art teach us about reality, and thereby bring us closer to the real. They bring us closer to real life, rather than taking us away from real life. As such, art is challenging, rewarding and fulfilling in a way that many other vicarious experiences are not. Art teaches us how to live. Escapist vicarious experiences help us flee reality into a fantasy world; art brings us closer to reality.

In my opinion, the snobbishness about Big Brother can be a bit much. Big Brother offers the opportunity to watch people and learn about them. People are fascinating. So enjoy watching Big Brother in reasonably small doses - and see if you can learn anything about human psychology while watching.

Shakespeare was not “a minor English poet”, complains reader

A READER WRITES: “You refer to a ‘minor’ English poet who advises us that ‘the course of true love never did run smooth’. I remind you that the poet in question was William Shakespeare. He was the greatest English poet of all time. There was nothing ‘minor’ about him”.

BB SAYS: Thank you for pointing out this correction. Shakespeare was, indeed, not a minor poet. Consider this marvelous quote from Macbeth:

"Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."

"Nobody reads my blog"

A READER WRITES: “Hardly anybody reads my blog and the few people that do are simpletons or weirdos. What should I do?”

BB SAYS: Not a problem. Hardly anybody reads my blog either, and the few people that do are either simpletons or weirdos. I have so few readers that I actually have to INVENT questions from readers. How sad is that?

But don’t worry about it. Hardly anybody reads anybody else’s blog. Who cares? You strike me as a person who has a lot of things to say for himself - a lot of things that nobody wants to hear about, a lot of ideas that are of absolutely no interest to anybody. Put them all on your blog, where they can remain happily unread.

(Purchase the Go Scott T-shirt here)

Do YOU have a problem? Leave an anonymous comment, or send your problem in confidence to brianbarrington@gmail.com