Monthly Archives: October 2011

Doormats or good mates?

Posted on by
6

V used to say that I was too nice.

What he really meant that I was a bit of a walk-over.

I always said that I preferred to be a walk-over than be someone who was always in things for what I could get from them.

But, you know, just sometimes, I wish I wasn’t like that? For I get annoyed but suffer it in almost silence.

This weekend we go away. I have arranged a ‘dog sitter’ to come and take the dogs out.

It’s not ideal as they will be on their own most of the day and all night – but there’s not much I can do about that. The dog sitter is a reliable guy. I used to see him in the park all the time, looking after someone’s dog or dogs. He got a lot of business, I could see, but he was really good with the dogs.

And then, yesterday morning, I am Skype messaging with a friend. This friend has some problems (but, then, who of my friends doesn’t?) and I have been empathetic as she will be leaving to go back to her own country soon. In fact, it was supposed to have been at the end of the summer. It’s dragging on a bit.

She has a ‘best friend’ in Milan but it seems they have fallen out. She has some stuff ‘stored’ at said ‘best friend’s’ house. She needs to get this stuff before she leaves Italy. She suggests that she come and stay at my flat (if it’s OK) whilst we are away.

If that’s OK?, she adds.

I can’t think of a really valid reason for it not to be OK.

Except that I don’t really want her there. I don’t know why, really. Is that terrible of me?

Worse still, she was suggesting that she come tonight! F isn’t terribly excited about that and nor am I.

She finishes work at 5 and will call me then. Maybe it will be too late for her to get a train? We would both prefer if she came up on Saturday morning (but early).

If she does come then at least someone will be there during the day and night for the dogs. So I need to concentrate on that.

Other than that, of course, I’m looking forward to this long weekend away with F. Just the two of us and (slightly guiltily) without the need to rush back for or get up early for the dogs.

An Italian view of the Knox/Sollecito Appeal result.

Posted on by
Reply

There’s a programme on TV called Porta Porta. It’s like a discussion programme. F likes watching it but it usually goes on too late for me. Also, it’s quite difficult to follow (for me).

The night before last, they were covering the Kercher murder case/Knox/Sollecito appeal.

Last night, at the restaurant, we (F and I) had a discussion about the result of the appeal. I really wanted to understand why the Italians (and I am generalising here) think Knox and Sollecito are guilty and the appeal came out wrong.

Obviously, we are fed different biases by our media (TV, newspapers, etc.) and I understand that but here are the results of my little survey (of 1 person, I know that, but it’s the best I can do at the moment).

The problem seems to be, that if the result of the original trial was so certain, the Italians question how the appeal could have completely overturned the original result. F said that a woman on the show (that he respects) had said that either the judge in the first trial was sleeping or there is something wrong with the appeal.

I tried to say that the problem was with the DNA evidence (the way it was collected, analysed, etc.) – but this was ignored by F. I said I didn’t understand why the mobiles discarded in the garden weren’t checked for DNA as they had belonged to the two Italian girls also sharing the house. He told me they were Kercher’s phones. I need to check. [Update: I have checked. One belonged to one Italian flatmate – but she had lent it to Meredith. The other was Meredith’s UK phone]

He believes that the police did a good job (outside of Italy, of course, we feel that the police did a botched job at best). He believes that they are guilty (Knox and Sollecito).

But the main problem is that – the first trial having been so decisive on the guilt of the two, Italians fail to understand how it could be that an appeal could have completely overturned that. To them, something stinks. And, whilst it stinks, then the pair are still guilty.

I wonder if we’ll ever really know the truth.

Milleluci – restaurant or bar?

Posted on by
Reply

“I’ll wait outside”, he says, “It’s very gay”

But he wouldn’t tell me over the FB chat. He waited until we were there.

We were using another Groupon coupon. For a restaurant called Milleluci. On FB chat I translated it as ‘a thousand lights’.

“Yes”, he said, “that’s correct but I’ll have to tell you later why it’s very gay”.

I got there first. It was very gay. There were gay people outside and when we got in, it was very gay.

It’s a bar and a restaurant – bar at the front and restaurant at the rear. It’s open from 6 p.m. until 2 a.m.

The service was great, especially as F did his usual and chatted to the waiter (maybe owner) about the restaurant and how fabulous it all was. Milleluci was some TV programme or something with Mina and some other singer. All very showy and very gay. It’s a restaurant that has memorabilia from that time (80s, I think). It’s red. And black. It has hand-painted red tables with a picture of an Italian diva of that time pasted on top. It has hand-made posters/pictures on the wall – again of the divas of that time. The music is also of that time.

There is a glitter-ball in the centre of the restaurant/bar. I suppose it’s mainly for the bar but WTF?

V and I used to go to this restaurant before, some years ago, before it became a very gay restaurant/bar. When it was run by some North Africans/Turkish people or something. Anyway, then they closed. Since then there have been a few restaurants and bars that have opened in it’s place ….. only to close within a year or so. The last I knew, it was a sushi restaurant – that was always empty.

And, now it’s Milleluci.

It’s a nice, trendy bar/restaurant. The waiter (or owner) was very nice. We had our plate of cold meats and salami to start with a prune/sausage/sage and something ‘thing’ that was lovely. We had a glass of prosecco as well. Then cold meats were nice. It came with a kind of onion marmalade that was also nice.

F chose some wine. It was good. The next course was a choice from their range of pasta, chalked up on a board. F had leek and something (which was really lovely) and I had the taglietelle with ragù (meat). I wish I had had F’s. Unfortunately, mine was not so brilliant and part of the pasta was dry and another part it had stuck together. But the taste was OK.

The main course was a choice of two meat dishes. I chose the costata (basically a chop) which came with potatoes. F, not liking meat, had one of their starters. Burrata I have mentioned before. I wish I had that too rather than my chop. Burrata is a kind of mozzerella. It is like having a soft, light butter but it is really divine. F’s was as good as I have tasted. Unfortunately, although my chop was cooked fine, it was tough. The potatoes would have been better if they had been a bit crispy – but they had a nice taste. The meat was nice tasting – it was a shame it was not such a good piece.

Then I had some chocolate thing, whilst F had their fruits-of-the-forest cheesecake. This was the only time I preferred my choice. Cheesecake, here, in Italy, I find too heavy.

We paid €20 for the wine. I suppose a meal with antipasto, secondo and sweet would have set you back about €25 per head – so, in the end, we would have paid €70-80 with the wine – but, obviously, we had more food than we would normally have.

It’s a nice, friendly place. We would (probably will) go there again but I will be more careful with my selection next time. Also, I won’t eat so much because now I am very fat.

In the end, they asked us to come to their one-year anniversary party, next Monday. Yes, they were very nice people. After all, they were gay and, as F said, “Gay people know how to treat their customers well”. It made me laugh …. inside, of course.

We talked about the Knox verdict and stuff as well. I will give you the results of my “survey” in the next post.

Once upon a time, according to the Daily Mail ………..

Posted on by
2

I don’t know about the UK TV but it was all over everywhere, here, last night.

The aquittal of murder of Knox and Sollecito. I could talk about how it was the right decision, given the atrocious evidence or the wrong decision, given that Amanda admitted being there and then changed her mind.

But I won’t since it is being written about ad infinitum.

And, in any case, I only get to know about the evidence that the papers wish to tell me about. And, so, I can’t really make a judgement on that.

I will say, though, that Rudi did a runner, whereas Knox and Sollecito did not. Rudi makes more sense than the other two. Especially Knox for, if I had done it, I would have been on a plane to the States before the body had even been found.

And, perhaps there was a really good reason why the mobile phones that were discarded had no DNA. And, anyway, what Italian leaves their mobile phones at home when they go away or, even, out to the supermarket?

No, it’s all very strange and impossible for me to say if the verdict was right or not but that is not the point of this post.

The Daily Mail Online, of course, wanted (as they all did, I’m sure) to be first with the reactions and quotations after the verdict. So, as with obituaries, they must have written it in advance and, since they didn’t know the verdict in advance, one has to write two versions – 1 for guilty and 1 for aquittal.

Fair enough. At the end of it, you have to do this and just fill in the odd blank at the time.

The Daily Mail said, in their online version that when Amanda realised what the judge had said she “sank into her chair sobbing uncontrollably”.

Apparently they quoted the prosecutors as saying that ‘justice had been done’ (as an actual quote).

Both Knox and Sollecito said they would appeal.

Confused? Well, yes, that’s understandable.

There’s a picture on the page explaining how Knox’s parents were ‘distraught after the verdict was read out in court’.

Apparently, according to the Daily Mail, ‘both [Knox and Sollecito] will be put on suicide watch’ and that this was ‘normal practice’.

Of course, the whole thing was a terrible mistake. The headline read: Guilty: Amanda Knox looks stunned as appeal against murder conviction is rejected.

Whoops! Someone may get fired over this. You had, even without any thinking, a 50/50 chance of getting it right but it seems the wrong one was put up.

OK, so everyone can make a mistake and the idea that most of the article wouldn’t have been written before the verdict is laughable – of course they wrote two and I don’t have a problem with that.

However, what I DO have a problem with is the direct quotations littering the article. Some even inside inverted commas – which means they are supposed to be the actual words said. This was, quite obviously, not true. It was impossible. The prosecutors were NOT happy and DID NOT say that ‘justice had been done’.

And this, I have a problem with. Not that I ever thought the Daily Mail told the truth but, to have quoted someone without them ever saying the words leads me to wonder if any of the quotations they use are factual and have actually been said. Or if any of their stories are other than complete fairytales.

In fact, perhaps it is better to preface each Daily Mail story with:

Once upon a time, according to the Daily Mail ………..

Something wrong? Or just my imagination?

Posted on by
4

There’s something wrong.

Well, maybe not wrong, exactly, just not quite right.

Or maybe it’s not that at all. But it certainly feels like that.

I can’t exactly put my finger on it. It’s not that anyone has said anything in particular or done anything particularly unusual but it certainly feels like something has/will happen. Soon.

Perhaps it’s the crisis? Perhaps, finally, it is having an effect?

And, apart from A, outside of work, there seems a slight change. We were discussing it last night, over dinner with An. People seem more worried about the future. None of us have children and, so, it is different, I guess. The restaurants still seem quite full, though. As I rarely go shopping (except to the supermarket), I can’t really say about the high street.

Yes, I think if I had children, I may feel differently but, as I said to An, you can’t really do anything about it so don’t worry too much. After all, if the world collapses (economically), everyone (except the very rich, maybe) will be in the same boat (or sinking ship).

So, back where we were. It all feels different. A concentration on petty (or seemingly petty) things. A tit-for-tat thing going on between management and workers. New work seems to be coming our way but is it quickly enough?

Or, of course, it’s all in my imagination.