LIKE most upstanding and morally wholesome ratepayers, I’m a huge admirer of the comedy writer and performer Ricky Gervais.
I love everything he’s ever done, culminating in the more melancholic but infinitely magnificent After Life. If you haven’t yet seen this, you ought to be ashamed of yourself and would probably benefit from a short period of imprisonment.
I was intrigued, therefore, to read remarks attributed to him that the world would be a better place if humans were wiped out tomorrow. And, right enough, I guess that, if they did have to be wiped out, it would be better if it happened on a Monday. Be a real bummer if it happened on a Saturday when the football was on.
But Ricky’s point is not so much about which day this should take place on, but the quite common ecological one that Earthlings have really messed up the planet and it would be a good thing if they toddled off, taking their litter with them.
This is unarguable, I suppose. Ricky also thinks that bees are better than humans for the planet and that dogs are morally superior to them.
I’ll be quite unusually honest with you and confess that I don’t have a bee in this fight. Nothing to do with me.
I concluded some time ago that I’m not of the same species as the noisy, insensitive, crass and brutish Earthlings. Nothing in common with them at all.
Presumably, as you’re reading this, you’re one of us too, enjoying (not the right word, but leave it) messages from one of your own who, similarly, due to a bureaucratic cock-up, got sent to the wrong planet. It remains my view that it was a mistake to privatise the reincarnation industry.
At the same time, I can’t help thinking that the planet would be boring without humans. Just stuff eating other stuff. Everything overgrown. Baboons and their ilk running about willy and, in a worst case scenario, nilly. Dogs wouldn’t have anyone to throw sticks for them. Cats wouldn’t get patted on the heid.
But the whole argument, I’m afraid, is above my pay grade. Indeed, it was something else attributed to the comedy writer that really caught my eye: to wit, that he has reached an age where he feels he can say what he wants.
He is younger than me, and a braver man into the bargain. As a newspaper columnist, I am far too scared to say what I want and have to keep censoring myself in case I say anything controversial.
It’s just not worth it, not these days, when – some say – democracy has achieved the same situation desired by dictatorships, by giving illiberal liberals and doctrinal zealots a voice with which to silence others. I’ll just read that back. Yes, I’d better insert a “some say”, so that no one can attribute that assessment to me.
Nothing to do with me. I don’t even know anything about the planet – not even sure where it is – and even less about politics which, as far as I can see, only leads to trouble.
Ricky, though, just breenges in, saying what he wants about God, political correctness and the Earth. It’s very courageous, and I think we can all agree that the world would be a worse place without him. In the meantime, roll on Saturday. If we’re spared.
Blair-faced cheek
IT wasn’t just feminists who were shocked by revelations that Tony Blair had done no domestic chores since 1997 when he became Prime Minister of England and the Other Bits.
The vast majority of chaps born after 1955 must also have been aghast. Secretly, some will have wondered how he managed to pull that off.
But to most menfolk it doesn’t make sense. There’s two of you in the hoose. You share the chores as best you can.
It’s true that, for a while, Mr Blair had a country to run and wars to start, but he’s no’ Prime Minister noo. Yet, still, he’s left most domestic duties to his wife, the leading feminist and top international lawyer Cherie Blair.
Since leaving Downing Street, she says, “he’s got into the habit of thinking that whatever he does is more important”. He’d use flimsy excuses such as having to take a call from the President of the US.
I can remember that, when I had to take calls from the American President, my burd at that time would take the phone out of my hand, tell the President to get a life, and direct me towards the sink or lavatory bowl.
I don’t know why the President kept phoning me for racing tips anyway. Must have been getting me mixed up with Alex Salmond. Leader of Scotland? I’ve never even been leader of my own house.
FIVE THINGS WE’VE LEARNED THIS WEEK
MAKING a shopping list saves hundreds of pounds a year, according to research by Ottawa’s Carleton University. However, drawing up a list, then forgetting to take it with you, adds to both your bill and your sense of life’s futility.
A BRITISH company has developed a wine bottle made of paper. The Frugal Bottle, with plastic food-grade liner, is supposedly more ecologically sound than glass. The bottles of wine will reportedly sell for £13, ensuring nobody frugal will buy it.
THE Democratic Nutter Republic of Iran has issued an arrest warrant for Donald Trump over the killing of a top general. The US President’s lawyers claim it wasn’t him. They say he doesn’t know anything about the general. Or Iran. Or international politics.
PORRIDGE and black pudding are set to die out as breakfast delicacies because the picky younger generation prefer “cloud eggs” and American-style pancakes. Cloud eggs consist of avocado on toast, and are rightly banned in many countries.
BOOTS, the controversial chemists, has faced a backlash after advising folk to wear sunscreen indoors. They say harmful UVA rays can get through your windows and start punching you in the face. Well, just board up your windows then.
Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel