I have never been a great buyer of short story anthologies. To me short stories are what you get in magazines, which, as I never buy magazines, I only ever read in waiting rooms and rarely finish because I get called in to see the doctor/dentist, whoever I am waiting to see. The only paperback anthology I've ever bought was A Quiver Full of Arrows, and I'm not sure I read every story.
I have just finished editing an anthology of short stories and thoroughly enjoyed them. I have always liked short stories, don't get me wrong. It just seemed a hassle carrying them about. Ebooks are the perfect medium for this type of story. You no longer have to carry around a clumsy paperback on the off-chance of getting ten minutes to read something. On your ebook reader any number of anthologies can be waiting for the right moment.
I am one of those people who can read four different novels at once and not forget where I am in the story. Strangely once I have finished completely I can't remember the name of the main character but I can remember the story.
But suddenly short stories have my attention. I have several collections on my kindle cloud, books I have bought to support fellow indie authors which I have never opened. My resolution is to download them and enjoy a new story at bedtime. Irish stories from Gerry McCullough, Scottish stories from Brendan Gisby, funny stories from Mike Church and some I have no idea about from Chris Niblock and Michael Brookes to share just a few names.
So make the most of your ereader and get some short stories for that trip in to work when you don't want to have your novel interrupted by the mundane task of every day life.
Happy reading.
Thursday, 8 August 2013
Saturday, 3 August 2013
Wolrd Wide Reach
I've just had a quick look at the stats on this blog to see where my audience is and have come away thinking 'Who the hell do I know in Brazil, Nigeria and RUSSIA.'
Strangely no one in Canada or Australia seems to be looking so maybe this is the wrong place to post this note! Will put it on FB too.
My point is, if there is a point, that when you write a blog or any such thing on the internet you have no idea who will see it or where they are. Maybe I'm stating the obvious, after all that's what we want, isn't it? Global attention. But I think, sometimes, people forget this.
In the meantime, why haven't my followers in Brazil bought any of my books? I know you haven't because there have been no sales showing from Brazil. Only .com, co.uk, .de and .es. thank you whoever you are.
Strangely no one in Canada or Australia seems to be looking so maybe this is the wrong place to post this note! Will put it on FB too.
My point is, if there is a point, that when you write a blog or any such thing on the internet you have no idea who will see it or where they are. Maybe I'm stating the obvious, after all that's what we want, isn't it? Global attention. But I think, sometimes, people forget this.
In the meantime, why haven't my followers in Brazil bought any of my books? I know you haven't because there have been no sales showing from Brazil. Only .com, co.uk, .de and .es. thank you whoever you are.
Wednesday, 31 July 2013
Does Legal = Right?
I admit I have broached this subject before but it hasn’t
gone away, so neither will I.
Yesterday, 29th July 2013, the High Court ruled
that the government is not discriminating against disabled people by insisting
they be subject to the Bedroom Tax, the unofficial name for having housing
benefit withdrawn from people claiming benefit for homes that are too big for them. It may be Legal, but is
it morally Right.This ruling is likely to affect thousands of claimants and it is totally unfair. Disabled people DO need extra space. They often require room to store special equipment, have spare accommodation for careers who may not live at the property but do stay overnight. This is apart from the fact that their accommodation may have been especially adapted for their needs.
There is supposed to be a fund to help such people but it would seem that this is either not enough or not being implemented, otherwise the people who brought this court case would have had no need to bring it.
So what is behind this bedroom tax?
The government is concerned that too many people are living in overcrowded conditions, while there are many people living on benefits who have spare rooms.
The first question that should be asked is why are these people on benefit in the first place?
Contrary to popular belief not all claimants are unmarried mothers with loads of children or scroungers who have never done a day’s work in their life. The vast majority are people who have led hard-working lives who have lost their jobs through redundancy, sickness or injury. Many would like to work but just can’t find a job because of age or lack of skills.
Why are these people living in social housing? Some might have lost their homes because they lost their job and had their home repossessed. Some might have split from their partner because of divorce. For a large number the three bedroom house/flat has been their home for a lifetime. Why should they have to leave just because the children have now grown up and moved away. These are not simply buildings but homes with memories.
Yes, with an ever growing population housing is a big problem. But simply denying the people who have homes the means to pay for them is not the solution. For one thing, there are not enough places to allow people to downsize even if they want to. A dear friend of mine is in this situation and has been told if he wants to move to a smaller flat it will have to be in a different area and then he will have to bid to get something because there are more people needing smaller places than there are places available. So it’s pay up or live on the streets.
Why are there so few homes available? Who knows. I put the blame at least partly on the shoulders of the late, supposedly great, Mrs Thatcher who allowed councils to sell off council houses. That would have been a good idea if the councils then built the same number of new homes to replace those sold, but they didn’t.
And while people are being forced out of their homes against their wishes, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of houses standing empty around the country. If the government is concerned about housing people they should be looking at doing something with these. But somehow I think they are more interested in getting money from people who are struggling to make ends meet because that is what is happening more often than not.
It would be very interesting to see what has happened since this change in benefits came into effect in April. How many people have actually moved to smaller accommodation? How many people who were living in overcrowded accommodation have now moved into larger homes? How many people have taken the option of paying the extra demanded by the government to stay in their home, putting paying the rent ahead of buying food and paying to heat their homes? Does anyone know?
I will end this blog post the with same question I opened with. It may be legal but is it morally right? The government is trying to make it seem that the fault lays with the people who live in places with spare rooms, but it is not that simple. Has this country lost its compassion for those less fortunate than the majority?
Friday, 26 July 2013
Wednesday, 24 July 2013
What Makes Happiness?
There was a report on the news
yesterday saying that a survey showed a worrying percentage of teenagers were
unhappy. My first reaction was that the percentage was not worrying, turn the
stats around and lots of teenagers were happy. My second reaction, what’s new?
My third reaction, when did happiness become ‘a right.’?
There are certain things in this world that are considered to be ‘a right’. Food, housing, education, safety, health care, these are the sort of things everyone should be able to access in an ideal world. We know there are many places in the world where these things do not exist. But happiness?
Happiness is an emotion that comes from within a person’s psyche. The richest person in the world could be unhappy, the poorest, happy. It all depends on how that person views the world around them.
The thing that galled me most about this report was the teenager the interviewers chose to make a statement. She claimed she was, or had been, unhappy because she never received a Blackberry for a present even though all her friends had one and she really wanted one.
WHAT?!
News for this teenager. Having ‘things’ doesn’t guarantee happiness. Ask any number of adults who have raked up debt in the pursuit of ‘things.’
I know parents’ spend a fortune on trying to give their children things that will make them happy, but when it becomes a case of ‘keeping up with the Jones’s’ then it’s time to explain the facts of economic life.
But back to happiness. Happiness cannot be guaranteed, it cannot be bought, it will never be universal. Contrary to the song you can’t MAKE someone happy. Two people can share the same environment, have the same background and the same prospects. One can be happy, the other sad. There could be factors that make life difficult or distressing. It’s up to the individual to learn to deal with these and find out how to resolve them. That’s part of growing up. The world is not a happy place. Happiness comes from within. The sooner teenagers, and the rest of us, realise this the happier everyone will be.
There are certain things in this world that are considered to be ‘a right’. Food, housing, education, safety, health care, these are the sort of things everyone should be able to access in an ideal world. We know there are many places in the world where these things do not exist. But happiness?
Happiness is an emotion that comes from within a person’s psyche. The richest person in the world could be unhappy, the poorest, happy. It all depends on how that person views the world around them.
The thing that galled me most about this report was the teenager the interviewers chose to make a statement. She claimed she was, or had been, unhappy because she never received a Blackberry for a present even though all her friends had one and she really wanted one.
WHAT?!
News for this teenager. Having ‘things’ doesn’t guarantee happiness. Ask any number of adults who have raked up debt in the pursuit of ‘things.’
I know parents’ spend a fortune on trying to give their children things that will make them happy, but when it becomes a case of ‘keeping up with the Jones’s’ then it’s time to explain the facts of economic life.
But back to happiness. Happiness cannot be guaranteed, it cannot be bought, it will never be universal. Contrary to the song you can’t MAKE someone happy. Two people can share the same environment, have the same background and the same prospects. One can be happy, the other sad. There could be factors that make life difficult or distressing. It’s up to the individual to learn to deal with these and find out how to resolve them. That’s part of growing up. The world is not a happy place. Happiness comes from within. The sooner teenagers, and the rest of us, realise this the happier everyone will be.
Saturday, 6 July 2013
New Outlets
Tuesday, 4 June 2013
Change - Have We Got What We Asked For?
I was watching a television programme the other evening dedicated to the coronation of the Queen and what the country was like back then.
There have been many changes to our lives in the last sixty years. We like to think they have been good. We like to think we have progressed, and personally I think we have. But has that progress meant the sacrifice of other things? Are today's problems of debt, high prices and unemployment rooted in some of these changes?
The first major change has been the role of women in the family. Now I'm not against the idea of women having the opportunity to pursue a career, I definitely think they have the right to have their own bank account and take out their own loans if they can afford to do so. I'm not so sure every woman should be forced to work if she doesn't want to. Maybe that is because I come from the dying breed of women who have been supported by a partner and given the choice to work or not as I feel fit. I have worked, enough to get my pension in a few months time, but we have never depended on my income to pay the essential bills.
Back in the 1950s married women worked until they had children and then they stopped, at least until the children were old enough to look after themselves. How terrible I hear some people cry. But this actually meant job opportunities for young people coming into the job market. These days instead of twelve or more years being home with the kids, many mothers return within a year which leaves no vacancy for new staff. Just a thought, but maybe unemployment would fall if women were still in a position to stop working for a few years.
There is currently an outcry over the demise of High Streets around the country. This is not new, it has been happening for a long time because life-styles have changed. Back in the 1950s those mothers who stayed at home with their children went shopping every day because there was no way of keeping food fresh for long periods AND not so much to tempt you into buying more than you need. A shop bought cake was a luxury only for special occasions. I'm hazarding a guess here, but I bet in areas where it is still culturally expected for women to stay home the High Streets are still thriving.
So are we better off now? Yes, many people have bigger houses, more cars, foreign holidays, houses full of the latest gadgets. But they also have huge debts. We have only ever had a mortgage based on one salary. Once banks started taking two salaries into the equation it tied both partners to a lifelong job. All this has done is put the price of a house up, along with everything else, so no one is really any better off.
Most of us can live more comfortably than 'in the old days'. We are fitter, living longer, expecting more. But we can't have it both ways. We can't do our shopping in the 'buy it all' supermarkets AND expect the High Streets and village shops to continue to be there for when we feel inclined to pay a visit. Personally I prefer the supermarket where I only have to queue once rather than at half a dozen different shops. And to be totally honest, I prefer to look for things on line instead of searching for something in the High Street.
There have been many changes to our lives in the last sixty years. We like to think they have been good. We like to think we have progressed, and personally I think we have. But has that progress meant the sacrifice of other things? Are today's problems of debt, high prices and unemployment rooted in some of these changes?
The first major change has been the role of women in the family. Now I'm not against the idea of women having the opportunity to pursue a career, I definitely think they have the right to have their own bank account and take out their own loans if they can afford to do so. I'm not so sure every woman should be forced to work if she doesn't want to. Maybe that is because I come from the dying breed of women who have been supported by a partner and given the choice to work or not as I feel fit. I have worked, enough to get my pension in a few months time, but we have never depended on my income to pay the essential bills.
Back in the 1950s married women worked until they had children and then they stopped, at least until the children were old enough to look after themselves. How terrible I hear some people cry. But this actually meant job opportunities for young people coming into the job market. These days instead of twelve or more years being home with the kids, many mothers return within a year which leaves no vacancy for new staff. Just a thought, but maybe unemployment would fall if women were still in a position to stop working for a few years.
There is currently an outcry over the demise of High Streets around the country. This is not new, it has been happening for a long time because life-styles have changed. Back in the 1950s those mothers who stayed at home with their children went shopping every day because there was no way of keeping food fresh for long periods AND not so much to tempt you into buying more than you need. A shop bought cake was a luxury only for special occasions. I'm hazarding a guess here, but I bet in areas where it is still culturally expected for women to stay home the High Streets are still thriving.
So are we better off now? Yes, many people have bigger houses, more cars, foreign holidays, houses full of the latest gadgets. But they also have huge debts. We have only ever had a mortgage based on one salary. Once banks started taking two salaries into the equation it tied both partners to a lifelong job. All this has done is put the price of a house up, along with everything else, so no one is really any better off.
Most of us can live more comfortably than 'in the old days'. We are fitter, living longer, expecting more. But we can't have it both ways. We can't do our shopping in the 'buy it all' supermarkets AND expect the High Streets and village shops to continue to be there for when we feel inclined to pay a visit. Personally I prefer the supermarket where I only have to queue once rather than at half a dozen different shops. And to be totally honest, I prefer to look for things on line instead of searching for something in the High Street.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)