Could you possibly translate this post into the Queen's English?
Animating Accy
- Thread starter Gayle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- accrington accy map
Could you possibly translate this post into the Queen's English?
Anyone else have a problem with my post ? Always willing to take criticism on board ...
I haven't watched and don't intend to( I've lived here for 44 years so I think I know the place well enough) but good on Gayle for doing something to promote the town instead of just sitting her jacksey and constantly whinging about the place. And yes, I know it's her job, but she must have chosen the project knowing full well the amount of flak she would get from the critical, vitriol hypocrites on here that are all too quick to knock anything even slightly left field. Keep at it Gayle!
My understanding of hypocrisy is saying one thing, yet believing another.
I've seen no evidence of that in this thread.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
I didn't like the film. Some poeople do. I didn't. The animation didn't add anything to the interviews. It just left me wanting to see the actual people speaking, and I did find it a bit old fashioned.
I liked the map, as I posted.
I think the 'community art' crocheting project was a woeful, embarrassing exercise, as a piece of 'art'..
When I first mentioned the crocheting, it was in relation to the Market Hall refurbishment. When the traders were telling people it was funded by the 'council'.
I had no idea Gayle had any connection to the project.
As far as I knew, when she replied to Acrylic-bob, about what her role was at H.B.C., I thought she replied she was now creative director of the arts centre in Oswaldtwistle, and she gave the salary. Though I don't remember seeing the post advertised. I, and presumably others, don't know she now has other offical responsibilities in Hyndburn.
People are free to give their opinions, when things are posted for discussion.
I look forward to seeing any examples of hypocrisy. Just as in the other thread, about the value of commmunity arts, I look forward to finding out where the funding came from, and what fees and costs were involved, with these three promotional tools.
How do you know it's 'left field', if, as you say, you haven't actually watched the film, and have no intention of doing so?
Critiquing, and labelling something you haven't seen, could been seen as a tad hypocritical.
By others, I add. I hate attaching labels to people.
To be fair i think the left field comment was aimed at the concept rather than the film itself
I think you know me better than that, I am just a tad disillusioned by the negativity on this whole site, no friendly banter anymore, just shooting down new members and pointless arguments . If the money is a grant for a specific purpose, then that's all it can be used for, hence the Aldo Zilli farce and to some extent if the money was there to do a film, then yes, do it, do it as cheaply as you can and with the best results.
Don't all have a go at Gayle, as Katex was saying , sometimes she has to come in and do what she can when decisions have already been made.
*Just as an aside, no longer moderating ..a) already spend far too much looking at screens and b) recent events have taught me that life is far too bloody short for all this.
Nowhere I have I 'had a go at Gayle'.
As posted, I like the map. So one out of three ain't bad, and again as posted earlier, when I first mentioned the crocheting community art project, I honestly had no knowledge she was involved in any way.
I know Gayle. I like and admire her. We are probably quite similar, in that we both passionately believe in things, but sometimes these may be different things.
I agree that humour is as sadly as scarce as hen's teeth on here, of late.
That was my main point.
As a race we read peoples' faces. It's an inbuilt survival technique we've developed.
You have to be clever to overcome that desire.
You don't watch Walt Disney's classic 1937 Snow White, and want to see the voice over actress, because it's so believable as a piece of animation.
I watched the film, frustrated that I couldn't actually see those interviewed. The visuals didn't take away that craving.
Lindsay:
I can agree with the main thrust of your posts, particularly the bit about life being too short.
However, because life is so short, I think it is imperative that we seek to make the very best of what we have and ensure that what we pass on to the next generation is improved by our stewardship rather than diminished by it.
The carping and complaints surrounding this 13 minute video may be seen by some as a storm in a tea-cup whipped up by people who have little better with which to occupy themselves, and part of me would agree with that proposition; any argument is better than none if you are bored. But I also think that those who serve the public and administer the public purse must at all times be prepared to give a full accounting of their actions conducted in the public interest. To do otherwise leaves the door wide open to dictatorship.
If we are to avoid the creation of, and the evils inherant in the dictatorship of a cultural or poilitcal elite then we must be perpetually on our guard. As Edmund Burke helpfully points out: ‘The only thing necessary for the triumph [of evil] is for good men to do nothing.’
The discussion on this particular thread may seem, on the face of it, nothing more than petty carping over a ha'porth of tar, but it goes further and deeper than that. Indeed, it goes to the heart of the democratic process itself. At a time when all areas of public expenditure are being subjected to scrutiny and the need for a pound's expenditure to represent a pound's value and worth can hardly be more pressing, it is not surprising that the hardpressed taxpayer should question those in public life who hand out public money like some latterday Bourbon king.
Gayle may be very good at what she does, though personally, I have yet to be convinced. We cannot have someone dispensing public money whenever and wherever she sees fit and prancing around Hyndburn like the Mother Theresa of the arts world without reference to the taxpayer. Because in the end, one way or another, wherever this money is sourced it comes ultimately from us, the taxpayer.
And, even Mother Theresa was accountable to the Vatican.
Garinda, not unreasonably and not impolitely, has asked where the funding for three community arts projects came from. I will now add my name to that request, and I strongly urge others to do the same.
I can agree with the main thrust of your posts, particularly the bit about life being too short.
However, because life is so short, I think it is imperative that we seek to make the very best of what we have and ensure that what we pass on to the next generation is improved by our stewardship rather than diminished by it.
The carping and complaints surrounding this 13 minute video may be seen by some as a storm in a tea-cup whipped up by people who have little better with which to occupy themselves, and part of me would agree with that proposition; any argument is better than none if you are bored. But I also think that those who serve the public and administer the public purse must at all times be prepared to give a full accounting of their actions conducted in the public interest. To do otherwise leaves the door wide open to dictatorship.
If we are to avoid the creation of, and the evils inherant in the dictatorship of a cultural or poilitcal elite then we must be perpetually on our guard. As Edmund Burke helpfully points out: ‘The only thing necessary for the triumph [of evil] is for good men to do nothing.’
The discussion on this particular thread may seem, on the face of it, nothing more than petty carping over a ha'porth of tar, but it goes further and deeper than that. Indeed, it goes to the heart of the democratic process itself. At a time when all areas of public expenditure are being subjected to scrutiny and the need for a pound's expenditure to represent a pound's value and worth can hardly be more pressing, it is not surprising that the hardpressed taxpayer should question those in public life who hand out public money like some latterday Bourbon king.
Gayle may be very good at what she does, though personally, I have yet to be convinced. We cannot have someone dispensing public money whenever and wherever she sees fit and prancing around Hyndburn like the Mother Theresa of the arts world without reference to the taxpayer. Because in the end, one way or another, wherever this money is sourced it comes ultimately from us, the taxpayer.
And, even Mother Theresa was accountable to the Vatican.
Garinda, not unreasonably and not impolitely, has asked where the funding for three community arts projects came from. I will now add my name to that request, and I strongly urge others to do the same.
You a cynic cashy, neverjust watched it, was ok, bit too long, beats me what it will achieve?
Earlier in the thread Gayle said that she had received some emails regarding the video. One she quoted reads as follows:-
"We were all very impressed with this.
Do you know who ‘owns’ it and whether it would be OK for us to show it in the public area at the police station?" Sgt at Accrington Police Station
I have to ask, since no one else appears to have noticed this, wtf are the Police doing watching video's on the the internet and playing them in the public area of the police station. Do they reallly have so little with which to occupy themselves? And if they find this video so impressive what does that tell you about their taste and discernment? I note that the request comes not from an ordinary plod but from a sergeant if you please. If you ask me, somebody needs to take a closer look at the accounts of Lancashire Constabulary, to see what other of life's little luxuries they are indulging in at public expense.
More fois gras Chief Constable?
Oh Lord, I suppose so. But is that really all there is?
"We were all very impressed with this.
Do you know who ‘owns’ it and whether it would be OK for us to show it in the public area at the police station?" Sgt at Accrington Police Station
I have to ask, since no one else appears to have noticed this, wtf are the Police doing watching video's on the the internet and playing them in the public area of the police station. Do they reallly have so little with which to occupy themselves? And if they find this video so impressive what does that tell you about their taste and discernment? I note that the request comes not from an ordinary plod but from a sergeant if you please. If you ask me, somebody needs to take a closer look at the accounts of Lancashire Constabulary, to see what other of life's little luxuries they are indulging in at public expense.
More fois gras Chief Constable?
Oh Lord, I suppose so. But is that really all there is?
Last edited:
