Tweetness and light

The media has a very mixed attitude to Twitter. Sometimes it is given totally over the top accolades for enabling something like the Arab Spring to take place (there is no doubt it made a contribution, but equally no doubt that things would have gone ahead much the same without it). At other times it is seen as a lowest common denominator means of spreading gossip and tittle tattle.

Why wouldn't you tweet it?

I personally think it's a great way for getting and giving instant reactions. It can be genuinely interesting to see live response to a TV show, for instance, as tweets come flying in. And although I personally am not particularly interested in what people had for breakfast, say, it is very valuable as a way of highlighting something interesting or amusing. So, for instance, when I spot a van with an entertaining spelling error on its artwork, or when I recently came across a slow worm on my walk to the Post Office, Twitter was a natural way to make a quick comment.

This ease can lead to problems. There was, of course, the court case for the poor guy who remarked that he was going to bomb Robin Hood airport (what a name), which should never have happened. Twitter is sounding off, worldwide light conversation, not a place to generate threats and litigation. There was also the poor Welsh councillor who was hauled up for a disciplinary hearing for tweeting I didn’t know the Scientologists had a church on Tottenham Court Road. Just hurried past in case the stupid rubs off - ludicrous over-reaction for a personal response you may or may not agree with (I do agree) but that he should have the freedom to make without harassment.

I also find that Twitter is a good, painless way for a reader to make a quick comment to an author. I would never think of emailing Stephen Fry, say, but I don't mind blasting something off to him on Twitter. He probably never sees them - but that doesn't really matter. And when I get a response from the author, as I did from a positive remark having just read one of S. J. Parris's novels featuring Giordano Bruno, it feels really good.

Canadian bookstore purchases
Photo courtesy of Claire McCartney

As an author myself I also receive quite a few tweets about my books - and that warm glow works both ways. I received one the other day saying Picked up your book on gravity in Chapters book store in Ottowa, Canada and 1 hour later I was still reading it! Nice - that really made my day. It's not just the nice comments, but the thought of a book I wrote making a connection in a different country - there's something heartwarming about it!

I couldn't help asking if, after reading it for an hour, the tweeter had actually bought the book - and was even more delighted to hear that not only did she do so, but she went back next day for another of my titles. And chocolate covered beaver droppings. The way you do. (Why don't our bookshops sell beaver droppings?) I've even got a photo to prove it.

So don't knock Twitter. I get really irritated with people who say 'Oh, no, I've never twitted, or whatever you call it,' wrinkling their nose as if it's something tasteless. Personally, I'm all in favour.

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5. However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense

Search This Blog