Much ado about nothing sensible

Now I know that Hollywood produces works of fiction, and takes very extensive liberties with any actual facts upon which a story might be based, but I've just seen on the hotel television a report about the new film Anonymous which said that Sony Pictures were intending to send out "information packs" to schools to promote its release.

Not only did the reporter not point out how far from reality the film's basis actually is, she actually suggested that it was based on a credible theory which hadn't been disproved.
Well, let me have a go, and this is without even trying very hard...

The film advances the claim that Shakespeare’s works were written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, who died in 1604. This was before 12 of Shakespeare’s plays were written, a year prior to the Gunpowder Plot alluded to in Macbeth, and five years before the Sea Venture ran aground off Bermuda and inspired The Tempest.

And that's without even trying to pull apart the "possibility" that De Vere put his own name to comparatively poor poetry while submitting works of genius behind an alias to a rival’s theatre company...

Quick (and admittedly not triangulated) research on Google tells me that the originator of this unintellectual drivel is an aptly named J.Thomas Looney, but unfortunately the stuff our schools might be getting won't come with a Looney Tunes label on the cover, just something that says it's "supporting education".

Capital (ism) in action

Walking back to Kings Cross after the HEFCE/AoC Additional Numbers workshop yesterday, I passed the latest tented village to spring up on the streets of our capital: the one apparently welcomed by Giles Fraser, the Canon Chancellor of St Paul’s Cathedral when the Occupy London Stock Exchange protesters gathered at the start of the week.

Now though, with the Evening Standard claiming that this national icon could be closed due to health and safety issues, he's not quite so keen. The position has rapidly moved on from his only telling the police to go away (Monday) to complaining that tourists are no longer visiting his Baroque masterpiece (Thursday) and therefore aren't contributing to its upkeep. Or to put it in free market terms: no visitors equals nothing spent in the gift shop, no food bought in the restaurant, and no donations from those with change to spare.

The free paper also includes an interview with Naomi Colvin, spokesperson for the protesters, who says that money might be raised to compensate the church for its losses, but she's obviously not bothered to think through how much needs to be put into the collecting tin to balance the lost income of one of the ten most popular tourist attractions in the country.

This is capitalism in action: it's not slogans, protests and collective sleepovers, it's a businessman (for that's effectively what Canon Fraser is) unable to predict the effect of 200 demonstrators outside his door on passing trade, customer access and turnover, and a well-meaning motley crew closing him down because of his naivety.

Leads me to wonder, that since neither of the parties involved seem to understand what they've got themselves into, maybe they ought to start charging the likes of me to take photographs of the tents and possibly sell some refreshments while they're doing it?
Then, they could simply give the money raised to the church and everybody would be happy; except possibly protesters protesting about protester's profiteering...