Profound

I was interviewing a chap the other day for a job in my team. I had seven interviews to do back to back, and he was something like number six - so by this time I was getting a bit bored. Generally I like to keep interviews fairly informal, but you do end up asking the old stock questions. Having said that, instead of "What are your weaknesses?", I'd prefer to say "What would your friends say about you?" or something along those lines.

Anyway, my day was brightened up by this one guy when I saw him discover a revelation about himself right in front of my very eyes. When asked what he could improve on, he replied that he thought he could do with being a little more self-aware. I told him that having just said that, he was already on the right track. I had to explain what I meant (like an addict admitting they are an addict), and I could see the enlightement spread across his face.

Not that it matters - he was a bit of a twat and didn't get the job.

In the lap of the Gods

Driving standards around the world vary hugely. As frustrated as you might be with old grannies driving at 20mph or being stuck behind some muppet in the middle lane of the M1, it's nothing compared to the shenanigans they get up to around the world.

In Vietnam, where motorbikes are the vehicle of choice, they approach intersections without touching the brakes, and effortlessly cross three other paths of traffic without so much of a prang - for the most part anyway. It's like watching the Red Devil Motorcyle display team - nothing short of genius.

In Bolivia, you drive like it's a computer game. Foot to the floor, no attention to lights or pedestrians, and a small bump here and there in a traffic jam goes completely unnoticed.

Indians are probably the most renowned bad drivers in the world. They can turn a two lane carriageway into four, they overtake on the outside of a bend with a cliff edge centimetres away, and they have no regard for pedestrians or 'sacred' cows. The locals say it's more important to have a horn than brakes.

As different as they are, they all have one thing in common - an unshakeable belief in fate. In the Middle East, they say 'Inshallah', or God Willing. When I try to reconcile this I find myself torn. On one hand it seems sheer madness to literally gamble your life and put your foot to the floor, based on some belief in a pre-ordained path set out for you by a higher being.

On the other hand, it seems quite sensible. Why worry? Just do your thing, and if you get smashed to bits, then so be it. It could happen at anytime anyway....

Billy Crap-iott

I like Grease - it's got some great songs, it's a bit cheesy, and it's an all round classic. What I would have though of it when it first came out, I honestly can't say. But I've grown up with it and it seems natural that people are singing songs all the time.

What I can't stand is the contrived song-writing of today's West End musicals. Something like 85% of all shows currently running in the West End are musicals. Why? What happened to a good old fashioned play with real acting? Why all the cheesy smiles, jazz hands and dull, formulaic choreography.

I went to see Billy Elliott a couple of years ago. I may be traumatised by the experience, so forgive me if I am remembering this incorrectly, but I'm sure there's a song in there about coal mining. For the love of god why? Where does it stop - will we soon have a song about walking up the stairs, doing the washing up, or taking a shit? Actually, the last one would be quite entertaining thinking about it.

Topics for debate

Speaking of debating - a great one to throw in the pot is music. We may not realise it, but we are incerdibly attached to our choice of music - it holds memories of childhood, teenage years, and almost every significant event in our lives. No wonder you can cause a few sparks with a couple of carefully selected comments thrown into conversation. Try these for starters:

1) U2 are twats, and really not that talented. Discuss.

If you say this to any Irishman, it is honestly the worst possible insult you can bestow upon them. I'm not kidding - U2 are like royalty over there. So if I'm going to offend a whole nation, let me take a minute to justify myself.

U2 have had some great hits - this is undeniable. But consider the amount of time it takes them to write an album, the amount of money behind them, and the producers they work with. Give this same resource to an 'average' band and see the results. Early TV appearances highlighted their amateur musicianship and, despite giving loads of mony to charity, Bono is undeniably a ball-sack.

2) The Beatles were in the right place at the right time. Discuss.

Again, undeniably, The Beatles have written some of the most iconic songs in history - so one could not possibly say they weren't a great band - at the time. The question is this - would the same people have stood out in today's competitive market? There's only a finite amount of songs that can be written - did they just stumble across the melodies before anyone else, or are they truly brilliant? If you're into music, you can pick up a guitar and play any three chords in a row - guaranteed it's one of The Beatles songs, so not particularly tricky if you ask me. And the lyrics - I love you, you love me , she loves you etc etc. Not the work of great poets - just your bog standard 60s tripe. Oh, and Seargant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band is absolute shite.

3) Abba's music is genuis and blokes shouldn't be ashamed to listen to it. Discuss.

Guys - listen to ABBA, they are amazing. Just don't get caught.

4) S-Club 7 had some great hits. Discuss.

See 3)

Argumental

I love a good debate, and never more than when the person I'm debating with is enjoying it too.

One of my favourite topics is "If you could combine two animals into one 'super animal' to take over the world, what would your 'super animal' be?" My stock answer is the "wasp-shark"; agressive, angry, mobile in the water, air and on land (to a degree). I'll happily challenge anyone to come up with a more deadly combination - and will even more happily debate the flaws in their assertions. This is fun debate.

What riles me is when an outsider from said debate gets 'uncomfortable', and starts trying to 'calm people down', as if we're on the verge of pulling out pistols or having a full-on fist-fight. There's one thing that gets my back up like nothing else - and that's someone telling me to calm down when I'm already perfectly calm.

So why do people get uncomfortable in the presence of two people having an animated debate? Without being allowed to debate, should we just accept everything another person says? Of course not - we are born to challenge, and this makes us mentally stronger and ultimately better equipped to challenge ourselves.

Please don't confuse healthy debate with shouty argument - they are two entirely different concepts.

What would you recommend?

When I was younger there was the 'local' video shop. Before the days of Blockbuster, these shops were little gems - they seemed to have one copy of every film you'd ever want to see. If the film was out, try again the next night. Nowadays Blockbuster has 20 copies of about 20 films, so your choice is somewhat limited.

One thing, however, has remained the same across all video/dvd rental establishments. You should NEVER ask the guy behind the counter what he thinks of a certain film. Why do I trust his opinion? He is nothing like me, and by virtue of his occupation if nothing else, he has completely different tastes to almost everyone on Planet Normal. What he thinks is great is almost always a bucket of shite. He is twenty years younger than me.

Nevertheless, if I am undecided about which of two titles I should rent, I will always defer to him for an opinion. He is always wrong and I am always disappointed, but I just can't help myself.

Although it was worth it once when I quizzed him about Deja Vu and he asked if I'd seen it already. Comedy gold - at least the first time you hear it anyway.

How Are You?

Ah, the period after Christmas/New Year. Many of us are back in the office/workplace now, and not looking forward to another year of drudgery. For me in particular, this time of year represents one of my least favourite formalities - smalltalk.

"Morning"
"Morning"
"How are you?"
"Good thanks. You?"
"Yeah, good. Good Christmas?"
"Yeah, good thanks. What about you?"
"Good....yeah.. good.
"Good"

To be honest, I don't really care. Whether you were round your parents or you parents-in-law is of zero importance to me, and what you ate in the way of Christmas dinner even less so.

Can we not just assume that we've all had a good weekend/Christmas/New Year/holiday/Easter etc unless we hear otherwise? I reckon I could claim back around half an hour of my life every day.

You get me?

I don't know about you, but if you ask me, to be perfectly honest with you, when all is said and done, with all things being equal, do you know what I mean? I mean, to be fair, at the end of the day, do you get what I'm saying? Innit? Yeah.

SATC

As far as I can make out, Sex And The City is a program about three prostitutes and their madam.

Blood from a Stone

The TV and Radio ads tell us to give blood, as there is a massive shortage of donors. Well, why not? Unless you don't don't particularly like needles, which is fine, then surely there's no reason not to give blood right? I'd generally disagree.

I have given blood several times, as I don't mind needles, and it makes me feel good about myself. The trouble is, they don't make it easy for you. I work in central London, so I'd love nothing more than to be able to pop out once a month at lunchtime and give a pint of blood. But it's near impossible to do that.

My nearest blood centre to work is only 10 mins walk away, but they are closed at lunchtime. Now call me daft, but aren't most people in central London there becasue they work there? And when do most people have the time to get out of the office? Exactly - lunchtime.

So,another time, I tried taking a late lunch, and popping in at around 3pm, only to be told that there was a one-and-a-half hour wait just to be seen. Plus at least half an hour to actually give blood. Sorry, but that's not how you process volunteers.

Finally, the exclusion list is outdated. You can't give blood if you are gay, or have ever had sex with a man. This is presumably because of the risk of HIV being present in the blood. But there are more heterosexuals with HIV than homosexuals - so where does the logic lie there?

Instead of spending millions on ad campaigns bemoaning the lack of of donors and how selfish we all are, I would propose that the National Blood Service take a long look at why people aren't donating. There is certainly no shortage of willing donors, just a shortage of their time.