On Being an Embarrassment to the Party

[miss_s_b]

Or: My Party is turning me into Granny Weatherwax When All I Want to Be is Nanny Ogg

(with apologies to those of you who do not read Pterry; some of this might be a bit opaque to you. This and this might help before you start)

You guys know me. I'm a good time girl. All I want to do* is have a few beers and sing lewd songs, and enable others to do the same if they want to. My personal investment in the character of Gytha Ogg is so great that she's front and centre in the banner at the top of my blog, with her cheeky grin and her mug of ale. But it seems that every time I settle down to have a good go at the hedgehog song of late, somebody in the party decides that's the exact moment to say something bloody stupid or pointless or ridiculous or illiberal, and I have to stand up and shout "I can't be having with THIS!"...

I mean, look at the list we've had of late. The tuition fees "personal pledge". The NHS debacle. The internet snooping. And it's not just the top brass making stupid policy decisions, either. Whether it's FCC thinking that they can subvert a perfectly clear conference vote or a party activist thinking that The West Wing is How Things Should Happen over here (rather than a fictionalised account of how things might happen in the US with no shoulds involved at all)**, there are large swathes of the party who seem determined to turn me into a curmudgeonly old bag.

Of course, when this happens there are invariably those who feel it's my reaction to the bloody stupid or pointless or ridiculous or illiberal thing that makes the party look bad, rather than the actual bloody stupid or pointless or ridiculous or illiberal thing itself. Because, you know, someone getting upset when the party does something bloody stupid or pointless or ridiculous or illiberal? That's EMBARRASSING. Much less embarrassing to let the bloody stupid or pointless or ridiculous or illiberal thing carry on and not kick up a fuss. After all, we're liberals, we're famous for standing by and taking it and not rocking the boat... Oh, hang on, that's not right at all, is it?

The thing about Granny Weatherwax, with her righteous anger and her admirable power, is... She's not actually a particularly nice or happy person. Sure, she's a useful person to have around, and she makes the world a better place with her shouty boat-rocking, but at enormous, and I mean ENORMOUS personal sacrifice. Whereas Nanny Ogg? She makes the world a better place too. Maybe not in as spectacular and showy ways as Granny, but she is no less revolutionary in her own way, her boat-rocking is of a much more - um - pleasurable nature, and she is both happy in herself and causes happiness in others. Most of the source of the happiness that she both contains and radiates is that sometimes others think she's an embarrassment, but she doesn't care. It's an art I've never quite fully mastered, but I'm pretty close.

So, I'm going to keep doing what I do, and you lot? You can like me or lump me.



Haters Gonna Hate.

---

* Well, not ALL I want to do, but, you know... ;)
** I'm going to extend the same courtesy to him as he does to me in his thinly veiled character assassination of me (now at two posts and all he has thought worthy to blog about for the past week) and not link to him at all and leave you guys to work out for yourselves who I am talking about.

Comments

[thepotterblogger.blogspot.com]

THIS.

Couldn't agree more. As my best friend said "if they don't want to look bad when something becomes public then they shouldn't do something bad in the first place".

[magister]

Your best friend sounds a person of great sagacity and good sense.

[miss_s_b]

Thank you sweetie.

Thank you

[(Anonymous)]

I really loved this post... I fear I am your male version. Perhaps a little more toby but.... basically agreed

Re: Thank you

[miss_s_b]

Toby as in jug? ;)



Fear not, anony mouse. If you're a male version of me you might get the odd person who sniggers about you behind your back or whatever, but you'll have a hell of a lot more fun than people who worry too much about what other peoplke think to actually ever DO anything.

[lizw]

Fantastic post. And personally, I found myself wondering if he'd forgotten that Toby Ziegler has something of a change of heart on confidentiality in later seasons: leaks not merely confidential information, but a classified military secret; nearly goes to jail for it; and saves several lives in the process.

[miss_s_b]

Mat made me try to watch the West Wing. It appeared to me to be about a lot of fundamentally unlikeable people shouting at each other. I gave up on it after an episode and a half.

[magister]

Good point. I'd completely forgotten that.

[matthewfharris]

Actually, that thought did occur to me

I am the blogger to whom you refer

[matthewfharris]

Who are Granny Weatherwax and Nanny Ogg and what do they have to do with any serious discussion of politics?! What on Earth is the Hedgehog Song? Is it something to do with children's television? I could find out about all of this from Google, but I would prefer to live in ignorance. This revolves around: http://matthewfharris.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/more-on-those-deflated-and-chastised.html Firstly, I have never engaged in "character assassination" - how does criticising blog postings amount to "character assassination"? Secondly, I did link to your blog - I included a link to that Golden Dozen page that included the relevant post by you. Thirdly, you say that this matter is "all that (I have) thought worthy to blog about for the past week", and that is simply untrue - I have blogged about loads of other, unrelated things in the past week.

Re: I am the blogger to whom you refer

[miss_s_b]

I could find out about all of this from Google

... or even by clicking the links helpfully provided in the post above...

but I would prefer to live in ignorance

That is painfully obvious. You didn't criticise anything. You posted a bit of popular culture which you seemed to think was an apt analogy. I am merely responding with an analogy of my own. The fact that, while you ARE familiar with an American TV show I have never watched, you are not familiar with the works of the biggest selling British author in the last fifty years shows me that your fiction tastes vary so widely from mine that we're unlikely to find analogies that are comprehensible to both of us...

Re: I am the blogger to whom you refer

[andrewhickey.info]

"This revolves around: http://matthewfharris.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/more-on-those-deflated-and-chastised.html"

And your previous post.

"Firstly, I have never engaged in "character assassination" - how does criticising blog postings amount to "character assassination"?"
"I'm not out to embarrass fellow members of the team, and that means thinking before I speak" - that implies that Jennie either *was* 'out to embarrass fellow members of the team' or didn't think before she thought. (Of course a huge part of the problem here is that some people don't include the grassroots in 'the team' at all).

"Secondly, I did link to your blog - I included a link to that Golden Dozen page that included the relevant post by you."

So this is a new definition of 'link to your blog' that actually means 'link to someone else's blog' then.

[matthewfharris]

Ah, but I said that my reference was to The West Wing. You made your references without explaining that they were to (I'm guessing) Terry Pratchett. I tried to read Terry Pratchett once, but couldn't get into him. Douglas Adams, very much yes, but Pratchett, for me, no, sadly. Hence my confusion, especially about the Hedgehog Song, which, to those of you who don't know what you are talking about, does sound faintly daft when referenced without explanation on your political blog.

I don't buy the idea that anything that I have said amounts to "character assassination". I do think that linking to a page that is itself a collection of blog postings (i.e. last week's Golden Dozen) amounts to linking to Jennie's blog, yes.

I have nothing further to add and will not be returning to this site.

[strangecharm]

The links that you refuse to click on make it immediately clear that they are characters in Terry Pratchett's books, so if you weren't so happy in your ignorance, you'd be able to realize that Jennie quoted her sources as well as you did.

"your political blog" made me laugh, though. It's Jennie's political blog in the same way it's her horror movie blog or her work blog or her family blog or her feminist blog; it's her blog, and its wide range of topics is one of the many joys you'll be missing out on now that you won't visit it again now that you're done talking.

[magister]

"I have nothing further to add".

Hmm. Kind of implies that you've previously said something, which is being, at best, generous. Unless, of course, you're counting a couple of paragraphs of "Terry Pratchett? Who's he?" and a statement that you'd rather live in ignorance than actually try to engage with someone who you've previously criticised.

[andrewhickey.info]

To be fair, if Jennie had taken the same attitude to citing sources that you do, she would just have linked to this blog post on knitting, which in turn links to the wikipedia entry on Nanny Ogg, and then she'd have said she linked to the page on Nanny Ogg...

[magister]

"Hence my confusion, especially about the Hedgehog Song, which, to those of you who don't know what you are talking about, does sound faintly daft when referenced without explanation on your political blog. ".

Wow. Watch those shifting pronouns go. To quote Harrison Ford to George Lucas, "That's not writing. That's typing."

[andrewhickey.info]

Oh, and as for "I have nothing further to add and will not be returning to this site."

I'm reminded of something someone (who appears to 'think' entirely in quotes from other people, so quoting him is only fair) posted earlier today:

""As for people threatening to leave the party, including one or two candidates, I always think that the best response to such people is: "Shut the door on your way out." "

I would also like to note, for the record, that I did reply to Mr Fharris' reply to my comment on his blog, but he showed his well-known liberal love of open debate by refusing to let it through.

[strangecharm]

Also, if this is an embarrassment to the party, please continue to be it with all the fervor you put into being awkward. <3

[miss_s_b]

Oh, if you INSIST... ;)

Peace in our time...

[matthewfharris]

Actually, "Peace in our time" was the time that we failed to achieve peace and World War II broke out, wasn't it? So maybe not peace in our time. It'll all be over by Christmas. OK, not that one either. Sigh. I am sure that everyone reading this is a great Liberal Democrat. I'm sure that I would find a lot to enjoy on Jennie's blog if I read it more often. I'm sure that Terry Pratchett is nearly as funny as Douglas Adams and that I'd like his stuff if I read more of it. As for common ground, I got Colin Baker's autograph more than once when I was a teenager attending Doctor Who conventions in the 1980s (why I needed to get it more than once is an interesting question, it now occurs to me), and as there is a picture of Colin Baker's Doctor at the top of your blog, that is presumably common ground. I am actually a civil libertarian. There is probably much that we agree on, despite our differences in style. We all want the best for the party and, dare I say it, the country.

Re: Peace in our time...

[(Anonymous)]

The best thing for the party is being liberal and democratic. Not to mention a willingness to engage in polite debate.

So far on this issue I have seen none of those from you. This might be an aberration or it might be a regular pattern. I really couldn't know since I don't read your blog often enough.

But one thing I can be certain of is that your comments here have been rather rude and contradictory. And, given a choice between what you've said, and Jennie's informing people about a very important conference call, I'd say that *your* comments are the embarrasing ones which reflect badly on the party.

Of course you do now seem to be adopting a slightly more conciliatory tone - though I'd suggest that if you want "peace in our time" then a better solution might be an apology for the tone of your previous comments on here and a willingness to get off your high horse over your notion of what a political blog might look like - because, quite frankly, that kind of arrogant patronising nonsense is exactly the kind of thing to piss people off. I know it pisses me off at the very least.

Re: Peace in our time...

[thepotterblogger.blogspot.com]

Whoops, forgot to sign my comment - it's the reply which will show up as being by anonymous.

Caution: derailed thread

[daweaver]

Upthread, it was suggested that Terry Pratchett is the biggest selling British author in the last fifty years.

I fear that this may be news to great and popular authors like J K Rowling, J R R Tolkein, Roald Dahl. And Jeffrey Archer. All of these fictionalists have sold at least 100 million copies worldwide of their books; Pratchett is somewhere around 65 million.

The substantive point stands: different people have different cultural milieux, and it would be unwise to assume any commonality. For instance, when someone says "The west wing", I think of Noel Edmonds' gambling show Deal or No Deal, because that's how he refers to half of the set.

Re: Caution: derailed thread

[miss_s_b]

Thank you for pointing out a factual error, there. I definitely picked up that stat from somewhere, but I don't know where. I shall immediately issue a public apology to Rowling, Tolkein's ghost and the spirit of Dahl. I'm buggered if I'm apologising to that cheating tosser Archer, though.

I'm afraid I must reveal further West Wingly ignorance here, and say that I don't watch Deal or No Deal either... Watched The House that Dripped Magenta Blood again last night, though. And Bloodbath at the House of Death the night before. There may be a pattern involved LOL.