Showing posts with label Rachel Surtees. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rachel Surtees. Show all posts

Tuesday, 26 October 2010

The Meaning Of Life


By Rachel Surtees (@RVSurtees)

I have a theory. Hot off the press so to speak: I think that the idea that we're all still hunting for "the meaning of life" is ridiculous. I think we know exactly what it is and always have done.

For some reason we have allowed ourselves to be so overwhelmed by the enormity of the question that we've left it to the scientists and philosophers to fight it out. And yet, "the meaning of life" floods our every movement; shapes our legal systems; informs our sense of morality (both personal and societal); and colours every political system from London to Lima to Lagos.

How could it not? The meaning of life is the reason we are. And of course, every culture, family, individual will have a different interpretation of what it means to them, but surely the meaning of life is to live. Isn't it?

Isn't that why the idea of working in a stuffy office fills us with horror whilst achieving the holy grail of the perfect work-life balance so appealing? Because we all need time "to live" otherwise we begin to feel that life has no meaning.

Isn't that why we (most of us at least) find the idea of long-term imprisonment of young-offenders so troubling? Because to effectively deny someone the right to a chance "to live" freely is so contrary to our nature.

Ironically enough, isn't that why proponents of the death penalty have such an easy time defending their stance? Because acts that inhibit someone else's ability "to live" seem so indefensible.

And isn't that why we have memorials for our loved ones who have died? Because it allows them to live again - if only in memory.

Last week my father died of lung cancer. I barely knew him and yet have felt such sadness for him in these last few days. Because by all accounts he didn't live. He allowed past mistakes to prevent him from living and then died within hours of finding the forgiveness he craved but didn't seek out. What a shame. To have a life but not live it. Isn't it? Perhaps this post could be a memorial of sorts. Give him one last chance "to live".

Click here to go to first post

Tuesday, 31 August 2010

What's In A Name?

by Rachel Surtees (@RVSurtees)

I got married a couple of weeks ago. I think that there are a lot of interesting things to ask about that. For instance, what does marriage within atheism mean? Do you marry because you expect something to change or because it already has? Do you seriously expect us to save a piece of wedding cake for our unconceived child, or was that a joke? Yet the only question that people seem to ask is: are you going to change your name?

Just so that you don’t spend the whole post pondering, the answer is: no, we haven’t decided what we’re going to do with our names yet.

I’ve found the whole process of getting married wonderful… and fascinating. The mere mention of the word seems to elicit an ingrained and impermeable reaction in people (myself included). What’s more, not only do most people seem unable to control that reaction, but they also seem oblivious to it. And the issue of the name appears to be king.

There are two things that I’ve found particularly interesting. The second most interesting of these is that whilst the question is significant enough to be asked again and again and again… and again, it seems that my actual name pales in significance by comparison. “It doesn’t matter Rach, why not just consider changing it”, “Why hold on to your name Rach, isn’t that just ego?”, “Rachel Montes? It’s pretty.” As if that was in some way relevant.

By writing the above I risk offending most of my closest friends… which leads me to the most interesting thing. The pressure to bow to tradition hasn’t come from “society”, but from within my closest social groups. Odd.

Incidentally, no one’s asked my husband if he’s going to change his name. Perhaps that’s the most interesting thing.

So my ponder? My ponder is: what’s in a name? A quick flick through the papers suggests that there’s quite a lot actually.

1. There are those who have their names changed for them.

Hands up if you remember John Darwin? Nope, didn’t think so… how about the Canoe Man? There we go.

The Tabs have affectionately renamed the man who was brutally stabbed to death and hacked into pieces: Spy In The Bag… seriously?

Susan Boyle post-break down and post-waxing became known as SuBo. It didn’t catch on, nor did she.

I’ve become quite accustomed to hearing about Baby P. The tragedy of his story never seems to be far from us. And then every once in a while I hear someone refer to him as Baby Peter and the reality of it punches me in the stomach again.

2. There are those who adopt additional names.

Having a pseudonym has become an accepted and unquestioned tradition, particularly within the arts. But when you do stop to question it, it really does beg a question or two. Of course there are some who build entire personas and lives around a pseudonym and that ability is their artistry; think Banksy.

And then there are others who, like the George Elliots and Currer Bells of this world, rely upon pseudonyms to break down barriers and find expression. I get that.

But on the whole, pseudonyms seem to be used by people who are either scared that their “created” vs “true” identities are incongruous, or, they’re embarrassed about one or the other… or both… and so hide behind a pseudonym. And on the whole, we accept this practice. Perhaps we shouldn’t? I’m not sure.

3. There are those who give up their names all together.

The jury’s still out on this one too. There’s something distinctly uncomfortable about the current use of anonymity. Again, there are clearly situations in which the right to anonymity is not only acceptable, but should be fiercely protected. But, if you give a statement to the press, or post online anonymously, i.e. you’re not willing to put your name to it, then why should anyone be willing to give validity to what you’re saying? Surely, by indiscriminately encouraging anonymity, all we’re encouraging is cowardice?

4. There are those who have become convinced of “the value” of their names.

Super injunction. I’m afraid I can’t say anymore.


There isn’t necessarily a consistent theme to the above, except that names clearly matter, otherwise why would we go through the hassle of changing or hiding them.

So all in all, I don’t know what’s in a name… but I do know that there’s something. I also know that I’m not going to be in a hurry to lose mine just yet. So maybe I’ll be Rachel Montes, or maybe he’ll be Mr Surtees, but either way, I do wish people would stop asking.

Click here to go to first post

Tuesday, 2 March 2010

The Etiquette Of Riding A Bus

by Rachel Surtees (@RVSurtees)

Etiquette isn’t really a word that you hear bandied about much anymore. It’s become a relic of the past like corn beef, or petticoats. But enough is enough Britain (or do I just mean London?); surely it’s time to reinstate some etiquette on the buses? Reaffirm a code of honour? Reinstate a mode of practice?

So today, you’re not going to get a traditional ponder. You’re going to get ten micro ponders - all for the price of one.

Try to answer a couple of them. However, if like me you fail to find any reasonable explanations for any or all of the below maybe it’ll spur you to take a bus down to City Hall and have a little chat with Boris. Here goes…

The Boardee

1. You’ve been waiting for over 20 minutes, during which time three buses have driven past without stopping. I know because you told me. You told all of us in fact… at volume. I understand that you were very busy with all of that waiting that you had to contend with, but surely, surely you could have found the time to unzip you bag, stick your little hand in it, rummage around a bit and pull out your oyster before boarding the bus?

2. Do you genuinely think that stepping onto a packed bus and shouting “can you move down please” is actually going to create more space? Believe me when I say I don’t enjoy journeying with my head wedged into a fat man’s armpit so if you see it, don’t ask me to move down. I would if I could.

3. When you see a pack of school kids running at the bus like donkeys in a derby do you really think that your perfectly rehearsed look of disdain is having any impact? Do you really think they care? I tell you, it’s far more fun to just do like Rome and get stuck in. Run faster, get your elbows out, tread on their little toes, push ‘em over to get to the seat first.*

The Boarded

4. Why did you open the window? It’s mid winter and there are 50 other people on this bus.

5. When did we stop standing up for the elderly and pregnant? Seriously, we’re known internationally for having debilitatingly good manners and yet all that we currently seem to have is a debilitatingly sophisticated system of selective blindness.

6. Do you not think it’s time to buy better headphones?

The Driver

7. You saw me running, right?

The Others

8. Dear Car Driver,

Can you see that pulling out into a queue of traffic and blocking the four oncoming buses carrying over 200 people to work is a deeply, deeply selfish thing to do?

Best

An Angry Bus Rider

9. Dear School Run Driver,

Can you see that stopping in the middle of a one lane road to drop little Timmy and Josie off, thereby blocking the buses carrying 200 people to work is a deeply, deeply selfish thing to do?

Best

A now late Angry Bus Rider

10. Dear Pigeon,

Can you see why flying directly into a bus might be fairly disturbing for those inside the bus?

Best

Me


So? Any answers?



* Calm down. I’m kidding.