"Oh it's pretty eclectic."
Now that means one of two things. Either "I haven't got a clue" or "I don't really want to answer this question because at the moment my mind has gone blank."
The dictionary definition of eclectic is: "deriving ideas, style, or taste from a broad and diverse range of sources."
And so I suppose that the eclectic answer in my case would be correct. I wouldn't say there is any particular genre or time that I focus on. I would say anything from the mid sixties to the mid seventies but then realise that I also enjoy music from the early sixties, from the 1950s and even earlier than that.
If I had to be pinned down I would say anything from 1960 through to the mid 1970s but then there's plenty of more modern stuff I enjoy. And I love plenty of classical music as well. So my tastes can't be pigeon-holed. As someone once said I know what I like and it doesn't matter whether its Avant Garde jazz or Abba. It all has a place.
I'm accused of not liking today's music. That's not the problem. What I hate about today's music is its manufactured nature. The way we make and break an artist within what seems like days. Today's star is tomorrow's remainders' bin. As Andy Warhol suggested everyone really does have their 15 minutes of fame, although today it's going to be more like 10 minutes. Most of them are sadly lacking in talent and this is soon found out.
There are so many powerful people doing a disservice to music - making artists and young people think they have more talent than they do. I'm sure you know who I am referring to here. I will write more about this in coming blogs.
* * *
I have spoken before about our village screen which has a film show once a month. I like to support it whenever I'm around irrespective of the film that is showing. Indeed on a couple of occasions I have been to see a film I have already viewed at home.
So I suffered Downton Abbey and yesterday went to see the latest James Bond film "No Time to Die." I have always had a problem with Bond films that goes back many many years. It all started when my father promised to take me to see Norwich City play. It must have been an important football game because we couldn't get in and so he decided we should go to see the latest James Bond movie which could well have been Thunderball. It was certainly one of the older ones. I was so disappointed at not going to the football that I hated the film.
To this day I dislike Bond films but no longer because of the football thing. I like my films to have at least one foot in realism but I dislike Bond on so many levels. I know many of you reading this will love Bond and say it's just great escapism. Maybe I don't want to escape and certainly not in the way envisaged by 007.
I found "No Time to Die" overlong and with a plot that veered between non existent and wafer thin. In fact it seemed like virtually every other Bond movie. The thing I really detest is the gratuitous violence and the way it cheapens human life.
And also the implausibility of it all. Every time somebody shoots at Bond they miss. Every time Bond shoots at somebody he hits. This film includes hundreds of shot being fired at 007 and it isn't until the end that one hits. There are too many car chases, too many gun fights and so little storyline which is stretched very thin over two hours plus. In summing up I would refer to it as an incomprehensible heap of old tosh with a poor almost non existent story and a heap of unnecessary violence. Call it escapism if you like .... but it's not for me. Although I was happy with the ending but can't believe it is the end of Bond - he will just return somehow in a different guise.