Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Gullibility clearly knows no bounds

Here are the links to four sites that sell what can only be described as "things that shouldn't be for sale or that noboby in their right mind would buy". In other words, sites selling the impossible or selling things that don't belong to them or that don't actually belong to anyone.

But clearly that view is not held by the majority as these products seem to sell very well.
And I must congratulate the people who came up with the ideas to sell what I thought, up to about five years ago, couldn't be sold.

Because it was about five years ago when I first heard of the business idea to sell the right to name a star for a loved one i.e. one of those sparkly things out in space. And having bought that right it would be your star forevermore for the reasonable price of about 20 quid, what a romantic present! (see link two)

Hang on I thought. Surely no one is that gullible that they're going to pay 20 notes to get a framed certificate saying they've named a star for their loved one, and that it's now offically their star...surely no one is going to fall for this snake oil con? Well I was wrong, there are plenty of people who have "bought" the "right" to name stars.


Then on Sunday night while lying in bed listening to the London based radio channel Talksport, I heard an interview with the young American man who recently came up with the idea to sell minutes in time (see link one). He was asked how much "time" he has sold so far and his reply was "Well, so far we've sold over 100,000 minutes at a dollar a piece" Ka-ching! How to make money selling the impossible due to the vanity and gullibility of certain people, well in this case over 100,000 people...so far!!!!


And now we come to snake oil operation number three the "bottled atmosphere" con (see link three). Basically you buy the "atmosphere capture kit" for a fiver (which is just an empty bottle) and you fill it with whatever sample of air you want, for example, open it at your wedding, or child's Christening and capture the atmosphere there..... okaaay! Surely no one... WRONG! ...people are buying it!

Then one that's actually been around for quite a while, bottled oxygen, (see link four) mostly it would seem being bought by sports stars and supermodels, if their advertising is to be believed, who just can't make it through the day without a hit of pure oxygen.... at 12 quid a pop!

Gullible? Not me! Although I did once buy a Ford Scorpio... hhmm...once bitten, twice shy.

Well, what's next I wonder?

Name my child auctions
Sort through my household rubbish for a dollar
Use my garden and pool for a pound an hour.....actually....nah!


Link one:

http://www.taketime.com/


Link two:

http://www.starlistings.co.uk/

Link three:

http://www.bottledatmosphere.co.uk/index.asp?ID=1

Link four:

http://www.wow-gifts.co.uk/oxygen.html

Friday, February 16, 2007

Politeness - nature, culture or etiquette?

I'm starting to wonder if being polite and helpful to strangers and acquaintances (i.e. not family, workmates or friends) is something that is no longer permitted in our society gone gaga on political correctness and equality for women. Or if it doesn't cross cultural boundaries well or even if human nature varies from society to society.

Last week, coming out of a cornershop onto the very icy street I held the shop door open for an old lady with a walking stick, because I could see she was having trouble keeping upright on the ice and that she was coming into the shop.

Now some Swedes are famous for not being able to say a straightforward thank you. And some are also famous for being unable to say a straightforward, you're welcome, when someone thanks them. Instead they say thank you in terms that praise your good nature, while saying it is too good. And they say, you're welcome, by putting down the service they've just offered or by turning down your thank you.

Well anway, being a non-Swede I was just about to say you're welcome to the expected "thank you" I was sure was on its way, when the old lady looked at me and said "you're far too polite" not offensively but not too kindly either. I mean a simple thank you would have sufficed you old bag!

Then a couple of days later, having dropped my youngest son off at nursery school, I had just come out of the building and was walking away when I saw one of the nursery teachers coming across the ice, carrying, with both hands, the heavy breakfast porridge kettle. Well naturally I walked back the 5 yards and opened the door, but before I even got the door fully open she says
"I can do it myself" Well of course I open the door for her anyway. Again a simple thank you would have sufficed missus!

Am I in a country where politeness is now considered rude because of some strange interpretation of political correctness and female equality? Or is it true that Swedes simply have trouble saying "thank you"? Or do human nature, politeness and etiquette differ so greatly from country to country?

On more than one occasion different Swedes have said to me that the population of Sweden still have the mentality and rough manners of argricultural workers and farmers, because Sweden was still very much an agrarian society right up to the 1970s. The only difference now being that these "farmers" are middle class, live in urban settings and have office jobs.

Now I don't know if that's true or even if I agree with it, but I'm starting to wonder after 10 years of mumbled semi-rude "Thank yous" and non-existent "Your welcomes"

Well like the Irish saying goes "You can take the boy out of the sod, but you can't take the sod
out of the boy" In other words rural manners and customs stay with rural people, regardless of location or job.
I'm sure there's an equivalent saying for urban people, but I've yet to hear it.

And woe betide the next person who's rude to me while I'm helping them!

Thank you

James, civil servant, city dweller

Thursday, February 1, 2007

When is a village not a village?

The question of "What is a village?" only started to rattle around in my head when, in 2000, we moved from our "town" flat in our medium sized town in Sweden to a detached house (what Swedes call a "villa". But which in effect bears absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to white stuccoed haciendas on the Costa del Sol).

Anyway our "villa" (visions of retired East London gangsters lounging by the pool sipping Singapore Slings) is located in what Londoners would call an outer borough. However unlike a London borough or suburb there is very little here, there is no autonomy of any kind, because it is simply an outerlying district of the town. And unlike a dormitory town it isn't even commuting distance into town it is only a five minute drive; because while adjacent to the town it is clearly separated from it by greenery and motorways.

What we've got here is the primary school for several surrounding suburbs, the only shop, and the church and its attached parish centre also for several surrounding suburbs. And a "villlage green" with childrens playgrounds where the church hold regular events and picnics during the summer - everyone is welcome.

So although in Swedish we are called a town district I say that we live in a village, a bit outside town.

BUT, when I look at other outerlying "town districts" I notice that most of them don't have any shops, don't have churches, don't have schools, they are simply dormitory suburbs.

In fact, our area is the only outer district adjacent to the town that has its own school, church and shop. And that is why I say we are the nearest village to our town because we have those public services.

What I would call the true villages a bit further out are more like small urban towns.

Now, what Swedes call villages are simply rural dormitory communities miles from any real towns or in my opinion "real villages", like where I live, and they usually have no public services at all.

Well, this is what Wikipedia says about English villages (although I've removed some aspects specific only to England i.e. Saxons) and I'll write "TRUE" after each element that is true for where we live and "FALSE" after each element that is false. I'll then do the same again for those rural communites in Sweden that are actually called "something or other Village". And so we'll see which are closest in Sweden to English villages, outerlying -in the green belt - town districts like mine, or the rural dormitory communities that Swedes actually call and name as villages.

Where I live first:

"The village is a compact settlement of houses, smaller in size than a town, (TRUE) and generally based on agriculture. (FALSE) In England the main historical distinction between a hamlet and a village is that the latter will have a church, (TRUE) and will therefore usually have been the worship centre of a parish (TRUE) The stereotypical village used to have a "big house" (FALSE) a pub (FALSE) and shops (TRUE) as well as a blacksmith (FALSE). However, many of these facilities are now gone and many villages are dormitories for commuters (FALSE) The population of such a settlement could range from a few hundred people to around five thousand (TRUE) A village was distinguished from a town in that:
A village should not have a regular agricultural market (TRUE), although today such markets are uncommon even in settlements which clearly are towns.
A village does not have a town hall nor a mayor. (TRUE)
There should also be a clear green belt or open fields surrounding its parish borders (TRUE)
The village should not be under the administrative control of an adjacent town or city (FALSE)

Ok that was 8 x TRUE and 6 x FALSE

Now for what Swedes today actually name as villages:

"The village is a compact settlement of houses, smaller in size than a town, (TRUE) and generally based on agriculture. (FALSE) In England the main historical distinction between a hamlet and a village is that the latter will have a church, (FALSE) and will therefore usually have been the worship centre of a parish (FALSE) The stereotypical village used to have a "big house" (FALSE) a pub (FALSE) and shops (FALSE) as well as a blacksmith (FALSE). However, many of these facilities are now gone and many villages are dormitories for commuters (TRUE) The population of such a settlement could range from a few hundred people to around five thousand (FALSE -most Swedish "villages" have only a handful of houses and maybe 50 to 100 residents) A village was distinguished from a town in that:A village should not have a regular agricultural market (TRUE), although today such markets are uncommon even in settlements which clearly are towns. A village does not have a town hall nor a mayor. (TRUE) There should also be a clear green belt or open fields surrounding its parish borders (TRUE) The village should not be under the administrative control of an adjacent town or city (FALSE).

Ok, for exactly the same aspects that was 5 x TRUE and 9 x FALSE

My outerlying town district: 8 TRUE 6 FALSE
Swedish named village: 5 TRUE 9 FALSE

That is only in comparison to English villages of course, but that is what I know and what I can compare to. And supports my view that when translating the Swedish word for a rural community it shouldn't be translated to "village" as it sends the wrong signal to English readers, and anyway isn't a village when viewed from the English idea of what a village is.

Q: So when is a village not a village?
A: When it's located rurally in Sweden.

Have a good weekend,

James, village dweller just outside town.