Comments on: A Package Arrives (part 4) The Contents Revealed

By: Funk

Funk — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 12:25:25 +0000

Chris
First of all, thanks for taking the trouble to go against all your obvious disdain for ‘pettiness’ and following the link anyway. I’ll address your points in order if I may?
1. My blog entry DOES say very little of the building and it’s ‘beautiful architecture’ – in fact it says absolutely nothing along those lines, I’d agree with you there. It does however point out in no uncertain terms that I don’t find the architecture very beautiful at all, so why would I go to the trouble of saying how lovely I think it all is?
2. Injustice and my fumbling history. Before I address this fully, please take a moment to re-read my piece, and perhaps have a look though the blog in general. You will soon note that this blog is as far removed from a ‘pro’ or even ‘anti’ Odeon site as you can get, apart from the piece in question. It is primarily a brain dump, a place where I iterate my thoughts, mainly for the amusement of my friends, and perhaps the 150+ a day visitors that I receive. The Odeon piece was written on a whim, and is not really even about the the Odeon deep down – it’s about my ‘fumbling history’ as you so eloquently put it. When I wrote the piece it was but one part of a series. Not a particularly good series, and of little interest to the casual observer I would imagine, but it might help you to understand what kind of place the Old Heatonian is if you read the whole thing in context. If I’m honest, I couldn’t really give a shit about what happens to the Odeon. Is that a crime? So any thought of the injustices it may or may not have come to represent are far removed from my process at the moment.
3. I don’t like the appearance of the Odeon. You nailed that one Chris!
4. ‘seem to say you don’t wish it to be replaced with’…actually, there was no ‘seem to say’ about it. I took the bit between the teeth and came right out and said it ‘I wouldn’t like to see another anonymous glass and steel and concrete monstrosity in its place’.
5. ‘Shit or get off the pot’. Not very eloquent? Au contraire! My sides were aching with laughter when I read that – noones said that to me since I was about 1 years old! You should really write comedy.
6. The pictures. I’ve seen the pictures Chris, I’ve looked at the proposals by the Civic Society. I’ve seen illustrations of both the interior and exterior from when the building was first erected. FFS, my Mum saw the Beatles there and has a photograph of herself outside queing to get in (although unfortunately no valuable autographed material). It was quite possibly lovely inside in its day, but every dog has its day. Once that day is over, sometimes the dog should be put down. Now don’t go getting all agitated again Chris, I only said sometimes. Many dogs, which have the love and care of a good responsible owner, who will make sure they are well fed, their claws are trimmed and teeth are brushed and they are well walked and exercised often live to a ripe old age with little or no additional maintenance, regardless of how lovely or ugly they look. But there comes a time – sooner when the dog isn’t as well cared for as it should be, when there is nothing else for it. When the emotional (not to mention the financial) pressures involved in keeping the dog going far outweigh the resources and tenacity of the owner. It’s not a nice thing to consider, but sometimes its the best thing for all concerned.
7. Thinking of other things than me. Ooh I do Chris. All the time. For example, right now I am thinking of you, and the Odeon, and any number of other things. It’s said that a man rarely goes more than 5 minutes without thinking about sex. I wouldn’t dispute that at all (but obviously not at the same time as I am thinking of you. Or the Odeon. Or maybe the Odeon sometimes, as long as I’m also thinking about the hot Australian girl and Woody). But I digress…

Thanks for the link back to Ellys site – I did manage to backtrack last night and find my comment. Ill-conceived is the word I would use to describe my comment and I have already apologised for any offence it may have caused, but in my defence I think my main intention was to drive a bit of traffic to my site.

Which it did, and I thank you once again for your visit.

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 09:46:13 +0000

Here is the link to Elly’s piece where you left you rather petty comment (http://ellysparkle.blogspot.com/2009/11/save-symbolic-bradford-odeon-but-why.html#comments). That should have warned me that coming to you page would just result in reading more pettiness.
Your blog says little of the building and it’s beautiful internal architecture or of the injustice it has come to represent. Your blog talks about you and your fumbling history.
You don’t like the appearance of the Odeon yet you seem to say that you don’t wish it to be replaced with… well, you don’t say anything really do you?
The phrase “Shit or get off the pot” comes to mind. Not eloquent but, in this case, fitting.
Take some time to look at the pictures captured inside the Odeon that shows how beautiful the interior is, hidden away under the 70′s false walls. Take some time to think what the exterior might look like if it were given the refurbishment it desrves. Try reading the Civic Society’s publication on their proposed regeneration.
Just take some time to think about something other than YOU.

By: Funk

Funk — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 20:40:54 +0000

Kate
Basically, yes. The whole piece is purely subjective, purely my own opinion. I never knowingly attempted to convert anyone to my point of view – reading through it again I think I hit the note I was aiming for, which was an amusing (again subjective) discourse on certain aspects of my relationship with the Odeon over the years. Romanticized in parts certainly, a certain fondness in the reminiscing, but stalwart in my opinion that I find the building ugly.
I agree that the council have dealt with the problem very badly, and on that point alone I would fully endorse your campaign and paint up a placard, if only to demonstrate my frustration at that and the other horrendous faux pas that they have committed over the past few years (Odsal Stadium anybody?). I didn’t intend to even try to invalidate Ellys opinion, and I would offer my profound apologies if it seems that way. Unfortunately I have lost the link so it is difficult to even pop over there and check what I wrote in the comments. So I’ll apologise anyway. Sorry.

Just bear this in mind though: when you start a blog, and you allow it’s readers to comment on it, you should always be prepared for someone to have a different opinion to yourself, and sometimes for that opinion to hurt. Me, I wrote at the end of my piece the following words “What do you think?” in an (obviously vain) attempt to emphasise that I did not consider my word to be the last one on the subject.

By: Kate

Kate — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:10:16 +0000

So what you’re essentially saying is that you personally don’t like it. That’s obviously a subjective argument but doesn’t take into account the criticism of the process through which the council and Yorkshire forward have gone to reach the decision to demolish. There are even people whose only interest in the campaign is based on the unjust way this has happened rather than a personal preferance for the building. Elly’s blog is largely her personal opinion, this blog is yours, it doesn’t in any way invalidate Elly’s or offer any new information, but from the post you left on her blog I visited expecting to be enlightened. It’s an interesting subjective piece about how you feel but no more than that.

By: Funk

Funk — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:44:59 +0000

Henry,

Don’t worry your little head about the Kris Hopkins questions – I’ve googled him. I’m sure that if his ‘fan base’ is as articulate as yourself, he will easily gain the 5.38% swing his party requires to seize power in the village of Oakworth, and perhaps save the Odeon for you. Now, if that does happen, what are you going to do with it?

By: Funk

Funk — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:20:30 +0000

Henry,

A lucid argument succinctly stated – you’ve certainly got me questioning my opinion on this matter. I know, I know, at first glance your comments might seem to be the inconsequential ravings of a misguided, ill-informed madman – perhaps this is what you intended when you constructed your prose? But me, I can read between the lines and see your passion – the way you cleverly added an ‘e’ to the end of shit to perhaps add an air of sophistication to your words. The way you added an extra period to your ellipsis, perhaps to suggest an insane passion for your subject matter which cannot be bound by the normal strictures of good punctuation.

I do have one question for you though:

Who the HELL is Kris Hopkins, why is he in Oakworth and why should we keep him there? (Oops! That’s 3 questions cunningly disguised as 1, but you knew that all along. Didn’t you?)

By: henry

henry — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:35:57 +0000

You’re talking shite. Save the Odeon….Keep Kris Hopkins in Oakworth !