Showing posts with label BOOKS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BOOKS. Show all posts

Saturday, 8 August 2020

ANDREW MARR'S HISTORY OF THE WORLD



A History of the World
AT AMAZON


I have just finished A HISTORY OF THE WORLD by Andrew Marr; he of the Sunday morning TV political interviews show.

It is a Tour de Force. A compelling page turner of a book, densely packed with facts, interpretations and commentary. So much so that all the way through I suspected Marr employed a large backroom team of Oxbridge History Firsts to research and feed him the narratives. Or, he truly is blessed with a giant brain that can indeed contain and analyse the entire world and its past. As Marr himself says, he set himself an impossible task in encompassing the whole of human history in one paper-back. 

It has informed me of the socio-economic and egotistical forces behind history's major movements, such as I had never imagined. A great, intelligent, very readable book which I recommend to you; to while away some of these, probably historically important Covid-19 days. Have a notepad to hand to ensure you get the most from this work. 

History is not a subject that grips me. It has gone. It can't be changed. Been there - done that. Our past seems to have been bullied into shape by sociopaths, psychopaths and murderous mad dictators. Imagine what the human race might have achieved without those loonies marauding round the world, slaughtering All the Men, All the Women, All the Children and All the Beasts of the Field and all progress to date, with monotonous regularity. 

The Future is of far greater interest; so I read Part 8, which looks ahead, with even more interest than the preceding chapters, of those old, deeply, deeply stupid, knuckle-dragging  lunatic "leaders" - driven by massive excesses of matted or peroxided hair, sweaty muscles, testosterone, spite and gross idiocy to wreak havoc on our lovely planet Earth. And to often die in "glorious" battle or to commit suicide when thwarted. 

So, I was somewhat disappointed that the hugely well informed Andrew Marr concludes with such thoughts as "...we will have a 50/50 chance of survival" (Martin Rees) and ...today's parents in the West are the first generation to worry that their children will live more meagre, if less wasteful lives..."  And , of politics "Unfortunately , our willingness to believe the promises of rabble-rousers and our greed, our capacity for anger and violence, are part of the story too."

Better, Mr Marr, to point the way to a wonderful future - and to impress the possibilities on all those dull, thoughtless, timid, myopic civic leaders who you interview on Sundays. You do have masses of evidence to support a pessimistic view of the future of humanity but I think that we, The People, are at a turning point - and will head off to the Sunlit Uplands. Try this article - and read my book AD2516. 

Friday, 15 June 2018

Thanks for the book.


Thursday, 5 March 2020

Isaac Newton's 21st Century Entanglement


Buy the book here

Get the Kindle e-Book here.

Spot the deliberate physics-student mistake about Light - and send me a note. 
The first ten will get a free print-copy - a signed first-edition. 



Once Upon A Time, I read weekly issues of New Scientist, monthly editions of Scientific American, dozens of books by particle and astro-physicists, and attended three-years of physics courses “For Continuing Education” at the University of Oxford.  I bought the first ever edition of New Scientist – and still get them weekly, and read them cover to cover; that’s sixty-one years of following the course of popular physics and science; hugely assisted by Jimmy Wale’s Wikipedia.

You might well ask, Why? What have I learned in six decades, about Life, The Universe and Everything. Mostly I’ve learned that we humans have gained knowledge of, say, one-percent, about how things work. There are many more, 99 to 1, questions than we have answers. So, “There’s a way to go before we rest.”

One of the most baffling areas is Quantum-Physics. “Quantum” refers to the fact (we believe it is fact) that every sort of basic stuff, basic energy, the stuff of the universe, exists in neatly defined packages. The particles have a fixed “quantity” of stuff; of energy. As far back as classical Greece, humankind has pestered and fussed and explored to conceive and consider just what is the smallest thing, or things, that make our universe. They also thought in quantum terms – and imagined the smallest unit was the Atom. Two or three thousand years later, Rutherford and others bombarded atoms and studied the debris and found sub-atomic-particles. We think that these minuscule motes, the bricks that build atoms, also exist in neat little packages. It maybe that the very smallest thing is the Quark (rhymes with cork). “Quantum theory” implies that such particles are discontinuous, with abrupt steps, one to the next. They have separate identities and are not “fields” – or indeed are not oceans. The fields and oceans of “pure-energy” are continuous and do not have steps. They are plasma; very hot, melted, merging, swirling clouds of non-matter, with electro-magnetic fields. When these clouds condense, they produce sub-atomic-particles; photons (light) electrons (orbiting in atoms) etc. etc. etc.




I have been mulling over these matters for sixty-one years. You will be pleased to know that I have, uniquely, solved the mystery of Gravity, that sticks stuff together. Read about it in this blog. And I have tracked other mysterious events and processes – presented in these colourful slides. 99.99% of scientists and philosophers will say, with great weight and authority, that I am at best misled, deluded, and, at worst, totally stark raving potty. I leave you judge.

However, one of the threads I have followed is “Entanglement” – and hence this book. Entanglement is respectable science, demonstrated experimentally many times. It says that when a sub-atomic particle splits (usual example being a photon, light, the most plentiful “quantum” in the universe) the two halves reform as nice rounded complete photons – and, at the speed of light, they whizz off in different directions. And, mysteriously, they stay in communication; always and forever. Because they are separating at the speed-of-light, and because Einstein proved that “Nothing Travels Faster Than Light”, these entangled photons cannot communicate with each other. But they do.

Einstein famously dubbed this phenomena “Spooky action at a distance.” He denied that it could be; then came around to believing. Entanglement works! OK?

One of my reality-checks when getting excited by scientific discoveries, is to remind myself that I am also made of the stuff of the universe. For convenience, I say that all objects are made of light, or photons. Basic quantum units. Yours and my brains are made of photons; organised in ways we cannot conceive – to make, forgive the pun, an intelligent organism. If we can “Know Thyself” in sufficient depth and consciousness, we can explore this stuff of the universe of which we are made. We are each a walking reference library of Life, The Universe and Everything. We just need to learn how to read it / read ourselves. And all our bits and pieces are, as my publishers put it “quantumly-entangled”.  

So, this is the underlying logic of how Isaac Newton and his young friend, Archie Wilkins, meet, discourse and flow through space-time. Throw in a little Richard Feynman time-independent occurrences (also respectable QED science) – and we have a pretty decent Time-Machine. It is of course impossible and sadly ungovernable  and non-directional – but the elements are there. Rome wasn’t built in a day.   


Noel HODSON - Author

Monday, 25 November 2019

OUTGROWING GOD by Richard Dawkins - A CONUNDRUM





OUTGROWING  GOD
To: Richard Dawkins Foundation For Reason And Science,
1012 14th St Nw, Washington, DC 20005-3403

25th November 2019

Dear Professor Dawkins,

OUTGROWING GOD – my question.

I wholly support your central message in OUTGROWING GOD. For mankind’s (and woman kind's) next evolutionary phase, primitive assumptions and practices need to be outgrown. We do need to grow up.

Your book, however, consciously leaves a void that purpose and reason might fill. For example, the chapter ‘Bottom Up or Top Down’ is a robust re-assertion of Darwinian evolution. It particularly stresses the random nature of nature and the universe, evolving over billions of years; allowing plenty of time for everything and anything to happen randomly and accidentally. 

The chapter asserts that individual and collective termites are not aware of any design for their mud-built intricate and efficient termite hills. We cannot really know the minds of termites unless we become one of them. But from my lofty position as an individual human and part of the collective human species, I can accept that humans are capable of “knowing” more than termites and other Earthly species. When I design and build a human home, I like to imagine I have a conscious plan and a purpose. Am I deluded?

Religion and science both tell us that we are, as far as we and our scientific instruments know, the pinnacle of universal evolution. As one of the 7 billion surviving humans, however flawed in design I may be, I have more insight and information about my state of being than into any other species or objects. So, logically I should first examine my own being.

My conundrum concerning the philosophy in your book is: Where is the threshold between the vast majority of randomly evolved creatures and objects, deemed to be unconscious and not designed; and our purposely, intelligently designed human tools and objects?

For example, the computer and internet I am using to create and send this message, has not, you might agree, come into being by a series of random, purposeless events, even over billions of years. It is a product of our human-collective intelligence and consciousness. Nor is its existence purposeless; we have purposes for our tools. Our aeroplanes, electronics, vehicles and thousands of other complex tools are designed by us. 

We are deliberate and purposeful inventors, designers and makers. If we, as natural products of Earth, are the resulting survivors of random and accidental events, of selfish genes, particle-collisions, brainless fertilised eggs, multiplying cells, Blastula and Gastrula, at what stage or threshold in our evolution did we acquire, by random-selection, the abilities to invent, design and manufacture purposeful objects? If the threshold is indefinable, an alternative is to propose that the materials from which I am constructed – which can be backward-engineered to the plasma at the (alleged) Big-Bang - might have those qualities.

This is a genuine query, not a mischievous trap, a cunning-plan, to bring you to God. (Unless you’d like to buy from me a £1 million, guaranteed passport to Heaven). I am not a believer. I am a lapsed Roman Catholic. I read and embrace science. Like you, I questioned and rejected my religious brain-washing from the age of 6 to 16. Some religions do include some profound wisdom and valid social guidance. Now, at 77 next, as the insurance companies put it, I have no “faith” but I still search for sensible answers to the big-questions. Your provocative books, papers and lectures offer signposts on my road to enlightenment.

PS – I have a tentative concept about how gravity works, as contrasted with what gravity does. Gravity etc: LIFE, THE UNIVERSE, AND EVERYTHING

Regards – Noel Hodson

********


Dear Noel, 

Your email to Richard Dawkins provoked me to pen the thoughts below:

I too rejected religion during my formative years.  I saw through the humbug.

I have long been an avid reader of Richard Dawkins, and agree with much of what he says.  On religion, I side with him in denying the very basis of what is preached, seeing myth, superstition and often powerfully-enforced persuasion at the core.

I cannot ignore -

·        the stifling authoritarian approach: such as the Inquisition and Papal infallibility (a mid-nineteenth century invention, this latter one),

·        the many grand-scale cruelties inflicted in the name of religion: such as genocide, crusade, jihad, auto-da-fé, torture and imprisonment (not that such activities are limited to religious groups),

·        the grabbing of temporal as well as spiritual power if and when the situation permits: permitting control over mind as well as body – such as the Holy Roman Empire, the Caliphates, and (one might add) Communism: and on a small scale,  the many weird modern sects founded by money-, power- and sex-seeking maniacs,

·        the intolerance of many, if not all, competing religions or sects,

·        the stifling of knowledge outside the teachings of the religion or sect: such as restricting the right of reading or interpreting holy books to the priesthood, and the burning of “unholy” books,

·        the unnecessary intrusions into people’s lives, such as controlling the rights to marry, to divorce, to procreate, to prevent procreation, to abort an unwanted pregnancy, to decide which foods can or cannot be eaten, and even to switch a light bulb on or off on a holy day.

·        the uncaring rigidity of approach, such as refusing blood transfusions to a dying person or abortion in a case of rape

·        the child abuses and similar egregious betrayals of trust by the priesthoods, which in many cases could be attributed to restricting the priesthood to men.

·        the apparent ease with which religion can be taken to excess, either by individual priests or laypersons.  All religions and sects seem to provide a fertile breeding ground (usually, but not always, limited to a fringe of extremists) for outrageous and even violent speech and actions.  I have not yet come across an extreme atheist, someone who will rant or kill in the name of atheism.  As to agnostics, I’m not sure.

And, let’s not forget -

·        the patent idiocies: such as denial of the earth’s roundness and insistence of its central place in the universe, etc.  And the belief in miracles, saints, angels, cherubs, walking on water, riding up to heaven on a white horse (from the principal revered site of another religion) … the list is long and risible.  One could only wish that all religions could admit that many of their “truths” are mere storytelling like the Nibelungenlied, tales of the Olympian gods or Tolkien’s Middle Earth.  Ah, for the intellectual honesty of David Jenkins, former Bishop of Durham, who admitted not to believe in the Virgin Birth!

On the other hand:

·        there have been and undoubtedly still are, many leaders and practitioners of religion who have acted in humility, possessed an open mind, were considerate of other people, gave of themselves, and who have been/are remarkable and admirable individuals.

·        significant benefits can arise from the act of people coming together in communal activities, of which a religious service is merely one type.

·        people who possess the right personal qualities and attitudes can indeed dispense wisdom and compassion (although members of religious sects are not the only ones qualified to do so).

But none of these require the existence of religion.  A person does not need to be a follower of a religion to be kind, considerate, and helpful to those in need, or to be personally at peace in the knowledge of his or her ultimate fate: just being the right type of human being is sufficient to permit these attitudes and actions.

Wrapping advice on social and personal issues in shrouds of mystery, as well as controlling believers with earthly punishments and post-life threats, seem to be the way that most religions control their followers.  Individuals may like these things, but others should be free to choose not to.

The problem boils down to this:

A spiritual aspect to our lives can be uplifting and helpful to us human beings, with our need for psychological and emotional stability in the face of the constant threats of war, famine, poverty, illness, loneliness, and, above all, the one certainty of life: its inevitable end.  But organised religions have not proved they can be trusted to deliver the uplifting aspects of life without also bringing in the negative, temporal aspects of their organisations.

It is a truth universally acknowledged (certainly by me) that religions tend to seek temporal as well as spiritual influence.  They need to organise, they need hierarchies to a lesser or greater extent, they need to teach/indoctrinate their members about the beliefs and practices of their sect, they need to show that they are superior to competing religions, they need money, they need properties, they need to engage in marketing (confirmatory messages to believers and proselytising messages to others).  In short, they are in many respects no different from other large organisations, be they state, commercial or philanthropic.  One could go further, and say that much of the teaching of each sect is aimed at denigrating other sects in order to bolster support for their own, and this bleeds into the purity of their essential messages (which, at their best, would be simple messages of harmony, peace, kindness, etc).

But it is the temporal aspects of religions that are the greatest problems associated with them, the cause of their usual failure to achieve their primary purpose of improving the lot of mankind, and the reason they need to be restricted in their right and ability to impose themselves on the unbelieving and the unwilling.

BEN

Wednesday, 30 January 2019

FROM CHAOS THEORY TO ORGANISMS - TIME TRAVEL



I have just finished the draft of a new time-travel novel, Isaac Newton & The Alchemist's Lad - The Perils of Entanglement, featuring Isaac Newton from 1666 and present-day ten year old Fred - who tells Isaac "My teacher says you were quite bright - in your day." The book is a very readable adventure for young-adults and the young at heart, which has the added bonus of introducing and explaining particle and astrophysics. It misstates two new-physicists' howlers - that you can no doubt spot and untangle as you read.

The means by which they travel through time from 1666 to 2018, then back again, is based on the well attested and fully accepted sub-atomic or quantum theory of entanglement. Einstein at first refused to accept the theory of entanglement, dubbing it "spooky action at a distance." Not only did the spooky action spook Albert but the theory also allows - or requires - that particles communicate over these spooky, sometimes long, distances, at faster than the speed-of-light. This, as you all know is impossible because Einstein proved that "Nothing travels faster than Light!"

His theories have been subjected to hundreds of experimental tests over the past one-hundred years, and have been conclusively proved to be correct.

Basically, when two photons are created from the splitting of another particle - often from electrons - the two new photons waste no time and zip off at the speed of light in opposite directions. Though they might journey to the horizon of the Observable Universe, forty-three-point-seven billion light years distant (so you can double that distance if they go to opposite horizons) - the photons, entangled photons, are in communication at all times. They are like identical-twins who are separated at birth and taken to different continents without any communication - yet still look the same, wear the same clothes, have the same hairstyles and both like pistachio ice-cream. They are mysteriously in touch. They are communicating - somehow. They are spookily "entangled".

What irked Einstein even more about these impertinent photons, was and is the fact that they were separating at the speed of light, three-hundred-thousand kilometres per second; and so it was and is impossible for them to receive messages from each other - because "Nothing travels faster than Light". No signal could ever catch up with the flighty photons. But, science proves and has proved time after time, that they are in touch. They chat to each to other all the time.

All objects in the universe, all things, are made of compressed photons. You, me, your parents and pebbles on the beach are all made from photons. An atomic explosion of, say just 100 lbs of uranium releases and  reveals all the photons it contains in an instant, immense explosion as the light and heat locked in there for eons is freed and made visible. The photons are entangled - then blow apart - but still communicating. So - I used this as a time travel mechanism. I teased out of Isaac Newton, with a radio beam, a few of his entangled photons. Because each was in communication, all the photons, trillions of photons, followed each other along the beam "Beam me up Scottie!"

By esoteric methods and science that I must keep secret - at the end of their journey from 1666 to 2018, the photons reassembled themselves in the right order and relationships - and re-made Isaac Newton - and he met Fred. The entangled photons knew their precise positions and functions to re-create Isaac. Time travel is made possible - without magic. 

It occurred to me this morning that this power to disassemble and reassemble must also be true for the several trillion cells in the human body. They know their functions; they cooperate; they communicate; new cells know their roles in the business of life; trillions of these immensely complex little factories know what to do - to make an organism that functions - that has a brain - has will and that can sometimes think. BUT HOW? 

Whether it is photons making a kilogram of uranium, or cells making a human; how do they know when there are enough? How do they know when to stop adding units to the object? How do they know how to confer a particular identity to the object - or to us? 

Like Goldilocks and the Three Bears - these minuscule packets of energy know when the object is too hot, too cold or, miraculously, is just right. A new human baby grows from one, a single cell, to two-trillion cells in nine months. How does it know when it has assembled enough units to trigger birth? This sweet little baby then grows into a 17 stone football player - of about 56 trillion cells; all communicating and swapping information - in a very spooky manner. But how does this hairy heavyweight know where its boundaries are. Why not keep adding cells - randomly? Where does the template - the governing pattern reside? We think we know it is governed by DNA, by inherited DNA, but where is the template, the controller, to assemble trillions of tiny particles into functioning DNA? My guess is that it is in the Aether, in Space-Time, in patterns of electromagnetic light and radio waves. 

Is it therefore possible, as I've imagined in my book, to dis-integrate, transport, and re-integrate the constituent parts of an object - of a human being - in full working order? Could we, one day in the future, use photon-entanglement at microscopic levels thousands of times smaller than a human cell, to separate the photons, persuade them to ride on a carefully calibrated radio beam - travelling or propagating even faster than light (in a timeless fashion) - and have them utilize their entanglement to bring all their chums with them, and re-form elsewhere in exactly the same relationships and functions as when they started the journey? Carefully managed - we could be immortal, as envisaged in SF movies where humans upload into computers - but without the need for computers. 

"Beam me up Scotty" indeed.

______

The extraordinary, precise communications between cells, molecules, atoms, sub-atomic particles and templates which enable organisms to transcend the sum of their parts, to function - and aspire to act intelligently, are the mysterious mechanisms or force of life.

I want to explore the concept of a fully functioning human - whose parts are self-evidently communicating correctly, as nature intends - and who is communicating with his/her community; the community without which we would certainly die or never come to life - going into outer or "deep" space, progressively losing the communications with family, tribe, race and planet. Will this super-lonely body also lose the inner communications between all the particles - and thus disintegrate? Do our inner communications depend on our environment, the teeming electromagnetic ocean in which we swim, with, currently, seven billion other humans?

The "Isaac" time-travel novel above, imagines that if entangled particles communicate, then teasing a single particle to hitch-hike on a radio-beam will trigger the adjacent particle to follow, then the next, and the next - ad-infinitum. The proven, demonstrable spooky quantum-entanglement might, could, or should inform each particle of it's unique place - in its ordained and accepted order - in the original body (mass). On arrival, at the target of the radio-beam, the second (entangled) particle will attach  to the first, then the third will find its position, then the fourth, then the cascade of trillions of communicating particles will take their places - and rebuild the original body, in the new location.

Our bodies do not have a definitive "edge". The trillions of mutually dependent cells, each happily playing its appointed role, if examined under an electron-microscope, viewing the alleged boundary, skin or integument, are seen to be loosely attached. A few drift away from our skin at all times. If rubbed, millions fall away and scatter. Most house dust consists of discarded human skin cells. The skin is bombarded with incoming particles, rays, beams, light. Where our skin meets the universe there is a zone of constant interchange. There is no thin red line - or brown, black, yellow line of demarcation which says "This person stops here." But somehow, we know where we end. We know our permitted shape and size - and in turn all the cells know. And if they know their function and place, then so do the molecules, made of atoms, made of sub-atomic-particles, made of light - within our supposedly private person. They all know their place. All parts are communicating; communicating vital data and energy. If they get it wrong we die. We disintegrate, we fall apart.

For seventy or a hundred years or so - they get it right. From our entangled photons to our factory-like cells, all the bits get it right. And we live. We are the product of all these communications. "We" ourselves - our unique identities - exist as an intelligent organism (with some notable exceptions) only because "our" sub-atomic-particles, which in isolation we might regard as dead or inert packets of energy, constantly, tirelessly, persistently communicate - with meaning and purpose. We integrate these countless trillions of communications and make sense of them. We are brilliant examples of the Life-Force.

However, we are not alone. Counting only our seven-billion or so living primate relatives and leaving aside the billions of other living creatures - and assuming that only the Earth produces life, we are forever receiving and broadcasting electromagnetic signals to each other. Such signals alter our DNA. We are changed by everyone and by everything we encounter. These communications are possibly the energy and organisation that create the Life-Force.

If one of us drifts into deep-space, far from such life-giving communications and energies - too far to receive and send - momentarily happy to get away from it all, because as Sartre told us "Hell is other People" - would we survive?

In the vast ocean of life, we are bombarded with waves of coherent data and information. We are literally "informed" by the signals we receive (and send). Our skin passes on the electromagnetic data to our (entangled) inner cells and down to our entangled-photons. Without this maelstrom of information, of vital communication from the entire universe - would we cease to exist?

When we do eventually succumb, as our number is called, as our three-score-years-and-ten, with added time for good behaviour, runs out - and our personal identity communications cease - is the pattern of all our communications on record, still broadcasting out to the 43.7 b.l.y. horizon of the observable universe? Is our essential self still entangled? Do our very personal entangled photons bounce back from the edge of time and reassemble, reintegrate and form another, quite similar creation? 


Monday, 12 September 2016

THE PLANNER - LONDON'S FUTURE?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Planner-Tom-Campbell-ebook/dp/B00KT57Y82

I rarely read contemporary novels set in London, or any city society; usually plucking a science-fiction or even science-fact paperback off the airport or rail-station book-stand. But, leafing through Tom Campbell's novel The Planner, initially captured by a memorable, striking snake-like shape on its cover, I was immediately caught-up in the author's most alien (to me), exotic and strange society, set in a London landscape that I find is entirely familiar. 

It was an alien abduction - not by little green men from Mars, but by what my fading and failing aged generation used to call Yuppies -  young upwardly-mobile professionals. These now not-so-young creatures, brilliantly portrayed and observed in all their haunts and habits, incidentally consume limitless amounts of sex, alcohol, drugs and partners, while holding down good jobs and playing out complex relationships.

They commune in central London, north and south of the twisting-shape that I had immediately recognised - the snake-like tidal River Thames flowing under Tower Bridge, by the City of London to the north, and by Southwark to the south; being the iconic focus of every map of that famous built landscape. In an earlier age, before these fascinating yuppies were conceived, I worked with Southwark developers of wharves and Technology Parks, and latterly on sea-level-rise at Tower Bridge. Tom Campbell's laconic hero, James, is a London Borough of Southwark Planner. Here we met, despite the age gap. 

We, my grey-power, post-war 1950's baby boomers and I, did not have "carnal knowledge", or drugs, could not afford alcohol, and married our childhood sweethearts for seventy-years of faithful conjugal bliss. The book's characters, who, like modern "customers", only need first names, break all our rules, without even knowing there once were rules. They casually indulge in Sinful Acts that would make the banned and scandalous Lady Chatterley blush and would once have condemned and damned us all to Eternity in Hellfire, after a short Earthly life punished and plagued by incurable STDs: (if you have ask - you are not a yuppie alien). 

But our heroic James navigates this intriguing moral, urban and civil landscape with relative ease. He mingles with powerful developers and financiers, attends tedious planning-meetings, debates with academics, falls in and out of love, snorts cocaine and parties through the night; and effortlessly embraces the e-revolution; determined all the while to do his bit to transform The London Plan. 

I have learned much about the next generation, and enjoyed the book's mastery of its subject and language; that I would have missed had I automatically picked up another sci-fi book displaying alien suns, moons and planets, urging me to "Boldly Go". It sometimes pays to be thoroughly Earthed and explore the alien but accessible world of top topical authors. Its a good read.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Planner-Tom-Campbell-ebook/dp/B00KT57Y82

Friday, 23 October 2015

Big Fred and Big Nellie - 1950's Manchester England

MANCHESTER AFTER THE WAR

SMITHFIELD MARKET - MANCHESTER 

Big Fred and Big Nellie - A balletic tale.

Heaton Mersey - Stockport - England - 1958: If Terry had not been driving the Standard 10 pick-up van along Cleveland Road pavement on that fated summer’s evening, then Peter-John Rider, Tony’s and Terry’s younger brother, with his movie-star looks, would have naturally taken the vehicle for a cruise round the district on what always appeared to be, but never was, vital business. Peter-John was not as bad tempered and curt as his abrupt manner, ruler straight trouser creases, polished brogues and rapid walk implied; except when dealing with his beautiful blonde sister, Mary-Jo, who was just a year younger than he. Like all the Riders, Peter-John was small but, unlike his father and two older brothers who were big men with short legs, he was, as was his pretty mother, ‘small but perfectly formed’.


Tales from Heaton Moor - original stories.

As the brothers matured from schoolboys, all poorly served and under-educated at Xaverian College, into teenagers and then into young-men, all three, including in his turn Peter-John, who had for years been the good-looking, strong, silent type, enhanced his sex-appeal by driving his father’s excitingly new and expensive cars and, when a car was not available, Peter-John had charge of the Tompkin & Rider pick-up; his daily work van. His twenty four hour access to a serious vehicle, of any type, with wheels and an engine, and with wages in his pocket, placed him in a higher realm than all of his contemporaries – other than Willy Mason. But infinitely wealthy Willy, whose very existence contradicted Wallace Simpson’s theory that “you can never be too rich or too thin - Darling” did not have the film star looks. 

But that evening, Terry had outranked and outreached Peter-John, had lifted the keys from the sideboard and without a by-your-leave had cruised off in the pick-up.

Peter-John even outranked Leon Marshall from Parsonage Road, another Xaverian pupil, whose War immigrant Lithuanian father owned several tailors’ shops and who sometimes allowed Leon to drive his automatic 2.4 Jaguar, which Leon proved, on nearby Wellington Road, could accelerate from nought to a hundred and back again in a few seconds, burning off only an inch or so of rubber while carrying up to six ‘speed referees’ to witness the feat. Leon, also good looking, that evening without a car but applying his considerable talents in winning the bowling match, enjoyed only occasional junior chauffeur’s rights compared to Peter-John’s adult rights to his own transport.

2.4 Jaguar - Leon Marshall's Dad's type of car.
The company van, purloined by Terry, always replaced after just fifty-thousand miles, so almost new, was part of Peter-John’s work equipment, enabling him to travel from site to site, officiously ferrying men and vital building supplies from the Tompkin & Rider offices in Smithfield Market to the outlying areas of Manchester. When a lorry was needed, Peter-John wasn’t licensed for large vehicles, so he would press Big Fred into service. Big Fred, a loyal and long term employee was …well, big. Local stripling youths, daily testing their physical strength and endurance and regularly measuring their bulging or not so bulging biceps, enhanced by cunningly folding their arms and applying their knuckles to push them out, could only regard Big Fred and his feats of natural strength with awe.

Where ordinary men might hoist a hundredweight bag of cement onto the back of the lorry Big Fred effortlessly loaded three at a time. Where common labourers cleared sand and rubble for hours with a size eight shovel, Big Fred good-naturedly wielded a size fourteen. When two youths huffed and puffed and struggled manfully to lift a roof beam onto the lorry, Big Fred, without bothering to breathe any harder, picked them up two at a time. Big Fred was strong, and in the immediate environment of Tompkin & Rider, the only person Big Fred feared, apart from his foreshortened boss Eddie Rider – was Big Nellie.

Despite the similar soubriquet, Big Nellie and Big Fred were not known to be related. They were however of similar size, probably of similar weights and even, with suitable allowances for gender, were quite similar in appearance. Big Nellie and her large extended family owned a fishmonger’s warehouse in the market, just a few doors away from Eddie Rider’s first floor offices.

A month before the Cleveland Road Event, Peter-John, in his usual terse, tearing hurry, but even more so one Thursday spring morning, whisked three young passengers, who wanted to get to Manchester, in the small Standard 10 pick-up, from Heaton Moor to the company offices, en-route to accompany Big Fred in the lorry with a load, an urgent load of course, to a site in Moston. 

With four teenagers packed into the two-seater cab, all of them smoking and flicking ash out of the quarter-lights, it was necessary for survival to have the main windows open – firstly in order to breath and secondly for safety purposes, as it was through the open windows that Peter-John, driving as if the survival of the human-race depended on his punctuality, forewarned pedestrians, cyclists, horse-drawn carts and other drivers, loudly, firmly and non-too politely, of his passage. He also blasted the horn a great deal. They covered the six or seven miles into Manchester centre on the main roads at a steady pace, around fifty miles an hour, through crowded streets where all other vehicles were travelling at fifteen or twenty miles an hour and were often stationery. This took some skill; skill that only a grim faced teenager, with three laconic po-faced friends, determined to show no emotion of any kind, could muster.

The pick-up-truck, carting a tall well used cement mixer in the back, charged and weaved and braked and twisted and turned and squealed and raced through the morning traffic. The streets around Smithfield were narrow and cobbled, packed with traders’ vans and cars and wagons parked in every bay, on the cobbles and on the pavements; and with shoppers of all ages and sizes carrying bulging string bags and brown-paper parcels tied with string. They blocked the alleyways solid – but they did not slow the van’s headlong flight. Peter-John’s highly effective technique was to drive at obstructions and people, at high speed, horn blaring, lights flashing, face set in a death mask, and to only divert from his chosen route at the last second if the obstruction proved to be immovable and indestructible or if the pedestrians stumbled and fell beneath the wheels with cries of despair, pleading for their lives.

Dogs were given right of way. Peter-John liked dogs.

Where the cobbles were blocked, he drove on the pavements, where parked vehicles intruded into their path, Peter-John would gently nudge them out of the way with the pick-up fenders, caring little, in fact caring not at all, that the inoffensive vehicle would be trapped in its new position for eons, until uncovered in some future age by zealous archaeologists. Where a pedestrian wandered down a narrow street in a pleasant dream, Peter-John crept up behind them to within twelve inches, then blasted the horn and swore at them as they leapt out of their raincoats and their terrified skins; before he swept imperiously past; the teenagers’ faces still fashionably deadpan, with Peter-John nonchalantly leaning one leather patched elbow of his hacking jacket on the window sill.

Smithfield Market Manchester
Thus, in twenty-five exciting minutes from Heaton Moor, they arrived in the jam packed street, opposite the covered market, outside Tompkin & Rider, where Peter-John braked to a sudden halt, double parked alongside a shopper’s car, consigning the owner to a very long wait, leapt out, locked the van and marched wordlessly into a doorway, into one of the centuries old, low buildings surrounding the market, and up a flight of stairs. Peter-John’s constant companion Noel followed, while the other two lads, still expressionless, melted away into crowds.

The offices were low roofed, long and narrow with ancient windows overlooking the street. As at the Rider’s home, every useful surface, including the window bays, was encased in the new miracle material Formica, in dark oak patterns, obliterating all signs of precious antiquity. In the office, his balding wispy-haired head brushing the ceiling, and having to manoeuvre his great girth sideways through the narrow doors, was Big Fred. He automatically put the kettle on the gas ring and lined up five large, deeply stained mugs, a half-used bottle of milk, a crumpled bag of sugar and a spoon secured to the table with string – and nodded amiably. No words were spoken but much understanding passed between them as Peter-John took papers, a small metal ruler and a building plan from a drawer, accepted the mug of dark-brown tea, with two sugars, which Fred pressed into his hands, and pored over the documents. Big Fred, as was his role, waited and didn’t even attempt to read the obviously crucial management texts. He handed Noel a mug of tea. They all lit cigarettes, none of them offering their packs around – the rule being to smoke your own.

Eddie Rider browsed in from his room, smoking a cigarette and wearing a fabulously expensive straw coloured overcoat draped over his shoulders and an equally pricey dark suit with a silver-grey waistcoat. His tie was secured with an understated diamond pin. He was obviously going out and he was obviously in a hurry, but not so hurried to not have time for a mug of Manchester tea that Big Fred was, twitching nervously, mashing for him, and not before he’d passed the time of day with Noel.

“How tall are you?” he asked with a pleasant, boss’s smile. Noel told him he was five-foot-ten and a half inches. The half-inch was of vital importance as it made him a quarter-inch taller, though he would deny it to his dying day, than his older brother Richard.

“Now I’m only five feet six.” Eddie told Noel, sleeking back his sandy, waved hair with a strong sunburnt hand, “…But I’ll bet you a fiver…” five pounds was a lot of money “…that I’m taller than you – sitting down…” And he smiled up at Noel with a broad, bronzed, superstar sort of smile.

Noel knew that though Eddie was carefully not looking at Big Fred, who stooped to avoid collision with the ceiling, these remarks were more for the employee’s benefit than his. Peter-John looked up briefly and coldly at this time wasting pantomime. Noel looked a bit gormless and Eddie felt the need to explain.

“I’ll bet you, young man, five pounds, that if we sit back to back, …I’m taller than you…” and he snickered loudly like a happy horse, waiting for Noel to protest.

Noel was sure Eddie was right, but he diplomatically obliged him and protested that such a thing could not possibly be. Eddie sneaked a look in Big Fred’s direction and beamed at Noel triumphantly. Noel didn’t have a fiver to take the bet but that fact was tacitly assumed and completely beside the point. As Eddie organised two precisely matched chairs and put them back to back, Terry in labouring clothes and a cloth cap bounded in, saw the set up, grinned wildly, grabbed a handful of notes from a petty-cash box while his father wasn’t looking and dashed out again. Eddie bade Noel sit up straight, as tall as he could, before Eddie also sat down.

Noel couldn’t of course see him and, sitting as still and upright as was required of him, it was difficult to turn round. Eddie though quite rightly assumed Noel would trust his integrity in the matter; and, like a good Christian, that he would believe without seeing.

“…See…” said Eddie; though Noel patently couldn’t see at all, “…I’m a good inch, maybe two, taller than you!”

Noel could feel Eddie’s hand waving around somewhere just above his swept-back hair and fully believed that Eddie was flattening his own hair with that hand then, with absolute fairness, was moving it horizontally backwards, without deviation, across Noel’s head to make the comparison. Peter-John snorted contemptuously and found reason to march around the little competition stage, on serious business. His father was unperturbed by this disapproval.

“Well…” he said, extremely pleased with himself and generously waving aside the non-offer Noel was not making to pay the bet, “…I have to get over to Williams and Glynn’s bank in Old Trafford and quote for some new counters and safety glass they want…” He was now obviously in a real hurry. So he hurried out. Peter-John sniffed and Big Fred visibly relaxed.

Eddie’s new car, a long black Humber Hawk, an automatic, with a radio, and which, inspired by American design, had squishy suspension that made its nose dip to the ground when braking at high-speed - as Peter-John had demonstrated to friends at a valve bouncing one-hundred-and-two miles an hour on the Cheadle-By-Pass - was parked half on the pavement across the office doorway immediately below. The market was as busy as ever, the streets blocked and, Peter-John, Big Fred and Noel could see for a fact, that Eddie’s car, built on a steel chassis, was irretrievably locked in, with market traders’ cars, also big, powerful and polished, jammed up tight against his front and rear bumpers. The three watched as he climbed into the Humber and started the engine. They knew that Eddie could not manoeuvre out of there. Big Fred started to fret; he didn’t want his boss to get upset.

Peter-John weighed up the problem with the reserved interest of a professional driver.

The Humber roared and jogged forward, pushing the car in front by two or three inches. They could see Eddie calmly flick the column mounted auto-gear change lever into reverse. The Humber roared again, more loudly, and half the street turned to watch. Eddie slammed the car backwards, clanging bumpers and shifting the car behind him an inch or two. Then he came forwards again, with even more revs than before, and smashed into the car in front, shoving it another three inches. Then back again, now with a loud bang that made the rest of the street jump round to see what was happening. The collision made another two inches of space and shoved the next car but-one into the lorry behind it. Eddie repeated the exercise, ‘bang!’ and ‘bang!’ and ‘bang!’

Locals waved unconcerned ‘hello’s’ to him as the Humber’s bumpers were dinted and the other cars suffered visible damage. Nobody was surprised or alarmed. Eddie Rider was a long time resident here; no-one was going to pin a note on the damaged cars. After ten or so shunts, the gap for the Humber was long enough and Eddie put it in drive – and swept smoothly out into the street, oblivious to pedestrians and vehicles alike, which simply had to get out of his way – or die in their attempt to stand against him.

“Daft bugger” muttered Big Fred in an admiring tone. This was the boss he gave his allegiance to, who had once again earned his respect.

Peter-John had finished with the papers. He put one or two bills of lading in a slim leather case which he tucked under his arm and asked Big Fred where the lorry was.

“I parked ‘im by Lewis’s in Market Street…” said Big Fred, and added with a veiled allusion to Eddie’s driving “…where we can get out from…”

“…It’s s’loaded. All ready to go.”

“C’mon then,” commanded Peter-John, starting to lead the way. But before they moved, there came an uproar in the street below that had the three rushing back to the windows – imagining that one of the bashed cars’ owners had turned up and was looking for someone to murder.

Across from and below the office windows, under the covered market canopy, a bunch of people had gathered around three central players – then, the bunch, thinking better of it, had backed off a few yards from the three, forming a respectfully wide circle around them.

Right in the centre was a woman. But this was no woman for virginal youths such as Peter-John, Noel and friends to weave fond dreams around – nightmares perhaps, but not dreams.  She represented the prima-materia of the Universe, the first Eve, the Mother of all matter, the foundation of the Earth. She was a large woman; every bit as large as Big Fred. She wore the costume, unmistakably, of a fishwife. She spoke, or rather hollered, unmistakably, like a fishwife. She no doubt smelt, if one wandered into her perfumed ambit, unmistakably, like a fishwife.

Her sleeves were rolled back revealing terrifyingly, impossibly broad, chilled and chapped lower arms that were attached to monstrous upper arms and hence to massive but shapeless shoulders. Her head, topped with insubstantial mousey hair tied up, incongruously, with an infant’s red ribbon, was massive. Her face was a slab of lard, with a small mouth, which when closed was almost invisible and when open was like the maw of a Sperm Whale. Her eyes were tiny compared to her face; dark, Gallic and piercingly fierce in their intensity. Her legs, mercifully wrapped and obscured in a long pink skirt and a stripped, waterproof apron, were elephantine; each would have adequately made the whole of a natural man.

This apparition stood, monumentally still, with her arms outstretched, extended seemingly without effort on her part. One blubbery hand encircled the neck of a man; not a small man by any means but small and helpless compared to the creature who gripped him. The hand completely contained the man’s strangulated neck, her fingers and thumb meeting at the carotid artery. The other arm, equally comfortably extended for as long as it took, ended in her massive fist. Within the fist were tightly gathered ample pleats from a second man’s shirt, vest, tie, waistcoat, jacket and, causing certainly some inconvenience if not agonising pain for the man who still wore, or was attempting to wear, these garments, the fist also gathered in his braces and consequently hauled the crotch of his trousers two feet higher than his tailor had ever intended. The watchers all wondered if the poor emasculated soul dressed to his left, or to his right – in normal circumstances.

“That’s Big Nellie,” explained Peter-John shortly, but even his quick voice betrayed a note of unconscious anxiety in the presence of this destroyer of worlds.

“She’s …a bit bloody tough..” said Big Fred, not bothering to hide his fear – and his admiration. “…There’s nobody in Smithfield can take Big Nellie; not even her brothers.”

The three watchers above stared transfixed at the trio outside.
  
“Don’t know who the blokes are…” obliged Peter-John, stimulated into a rare volunteering of information.

It was clear that the two men had friends and supporters in the watching crowd. But the supporters had obviously decided to act in a purely advisory capacity, confining themselves to helpful comments.

“She can’t hold you there all day…” one of the watching men encouraged the hapless prisoners.

Big Nellie slowly turned her head, like a hunting owl, and looked at him. He decided discretion was the better part of valour and shut up.

“She laid a bloke out last winter…” Big Fred told the others, “…he wus a wrestler, you know, from Belle Vue; thought he was tough. She walloped him with just one arm. Just the one hit. He was in hospital for weeks. He never came back here…”

Big Fred sucked his toothless upper gum, being at the stage of waiting for a top denture from the National Health, and sighed heavily; whether from deep fright or suppressed love was difficult to decide. They each lit another cigarette as it was clear they would go nowhere until this drama was resolved.

The fish market
“…OK Nellie…” soothed a big man in white rubberised apron and overalls, shouldering his way into the circle.  “One of ‘er brothers” supplied Big Fred.  

“…Let’s not do them any damage. After all…” he added reasonably, “…they’ve been good customers – them and their dad before them, for …well for a long time.”

Big Nellie was not quite convinced, she made no move, but to acute observers it may have seemed that she slackened her grip, a teeny-weeny bit. The strangled man’s colour reduced from bright puce to pink and his popping eyes settled back into his head – a little.

Despite the stay of execution, neither of them yet dared to struggle.

A sound came from Big Nellie and all around was silence to allow her voice the airwaves and space it so royally deserved, “Cheeky bloody sods,” she said sociably.

This was obviously a conciliatory statement as her brother came right up to her with some confidence and lightly held one of her ponderous wrists. “…I’ve a bloody good mind to just slap ‘em around a bit, before we let them go…” she added evenly.

Both men tensed with renewed terror, completely powerless to defend themselves, but neither tried to speak.

“…No need Nellie…” said her brother, keeping his voice calm and offering her the nearest thing his face could make of a winning smile. “…They’ve learned their lesson, Nellie. They’ll be good boys from now on…   …Won’t you lads.”

The ‘good boys’, who, when not suspended from Nellie’s arms were successful and mature business men in their early forties, nodded with ingratiating vigour. 

“…Well…” said Big Nellie, suddenly, horribly, becoming toe-curlingly coy, “…if they promise… I just might”

Nellie’s brother looked at his two customers, probably themselves brothers in a fishmonger business, and said nothing, but they understood nonetheless and found their collective voice.

“We promise Nellie. We promise. Honest we do Nellie. No harm done Nellie, a bit of a joke really.” They gasped in unison.

“You’d bloody better” she growled at them, her pacific mood waning fast, but she nevertheless let them both go.

Released, the neck man almost fell to the ground but two other men rushed forward and propped him up. The clothes man turned away and made brave attempts to tuck his crumpled shirt, through his twisted braces, back into his crumpled pants and to smooth out his crumpled waistcoat and badly creased suit as he stumbled quickly out of Nellie’s immediate reach. The crowd, by common consent and in awe, politely parted to let Big Nellie through and waited for her to start on her majestic way back to the family office before they began to disperse.

Big Fred wiped beads of sweat from his forehead.

“Staf’ut go now,” he said lapsing into broadest Lancashire.  (We shall have to go)

Peter-John leapt into action, leading Big Fred and Noel down the stairs through the alleyways and out onto the main shopping street, Market Street, which sloped down from Piccadilly to Deansgate. Peter-John, as neat as ever in grey cavalry-twill slacks, a country-style jacket, a smart shirt and tie and his hair cut and groomed very like his father’s, with his document case under his arm and a business like expression on his face, stepped out rapidly, clicking his shiny shoes onto the pavement with military precision.

Big Fred, in a dark blue overall with bib and braces, checked shirt, a ragged tie and a favourite old cloth cap, ambled behind him with his big legs easily keeping pace. Noel had to skip and run a little to keep up as they weaved through window-shoppers, around parked cars, dodged behind vans and lorries and risked their lives leaping in front of the almost silent trolley buses that warned of their coming more by their ozone, electric smell and blue, crackling flashes rather than by engine noise. The Tompkin & Rider Bedford truck, loaded with bricks, was parked at the traffic lights on the corner by Lewis’s main entrance and, as Big Fred had boasted, it was free of obstructions ahead. They scrambled into the cab, Big Fred now in charge; and the lorry lurched away, down the main street and turned right to detour out onto the road to Ancoats, as Big Fred wanted to call in at his home en route to the building site.

“Fred!...” barked Peter-John, “…where’re you going. Where are you taking us?”

Big Fred, not at all phased at being checked and challenged by this young management mosquito, calmly told them in a tone that allowed no discussion that he was going to swing by his house and pick up his lunch-box, which had not been ready when he left home at six o’clock this morning, while they were no doubt in bed, to go and get the bricks, now loaded in the lorry, which they were currently delivering.

Ancoats Manchester UK
With Big Fred’s unhurried and expert driving they arrived without incident in the hilly streets of Ancoats; row after row of small terraced Victorian brick houses with polished windows, lace curtains and spotless soap-stoned steps, pierced every fourth house by an arched passage leading to the network of cobbled alleys which ran behind and connected the community of all these homes. Infants played out in the streets, despite a persistent bright drizzle of rain, and Big Fred manoeuvred the vehicle with patience, as Peter-John jiggled his knee and fretted in silence. They arrived and Big Fred clambered out and disappeared into one of the houses.

Peter-John and Noel lit cigarettes and opened the quarter-lights to flick out the ash.

“He was born here…” said Peter-John suddenly, with some proprietorial pride, “…Grew up here with his brother…   …lived here all his life. And when he got married and his mum died, he and his wife stayed on. Right here.”

“Oh” Noel said.

Big Fred came back clutching his lunch-box, a square Jacobs Cream Crackers tin, and climbed into the driver’s seat.

Before the engine started Peter-John said “Fred!” but not quite as authoritatively as usual “…tell him about your brother…” and he nodded in Noel’s direction.

Big Fred looked at Noel carefully while he considered this request. He sucked at his gums and took a few moments to light a Woodbine. He weighed Noel up for another moment then decided he could tell him the family secret.

“Me brother…” he announced suspiciously, still scrutinising Noel’s face, “…Me younger brother, Charlie…” and he paused again, still not quite certain if he could be trusted with the information, “…Charlie, is a ballet dancer.”

The information didn’t fit. It demanded feats of imagination and a suspension of disbelief that were very, very difficult to conjure.

Noel looked at Big Fred; his great bulk; his huge hands and thickened fingers almost immobilised by hard labour and stained by building materials and tobacco; his half toothless mouth; his thinning hair splaying out from under his cap. Noel thought of the bits of ballet he’d seen on the television and on posters – Nijinsky floating through the air, his impossibly taut buttocks and shapely thighs sheathed in white tights. He looked again at Big Fred and wondered about his age. He looked at the tiny terraced house, one of millions, and at the anonymous pavement. It just didn’t work. But Big Fred was clearly deadly serious; and it was not a joking matter.

“Gosh – where did he – I mean, does he, dance?”

“Oh not round ‘ere…” said Big Fred as if the very idea was not to be countenanced, “…down in London,” he added with some relief, “…in a place called Covent Garden – it’s a bit like our Smithfield up ‘ere – you know, costermongers, fishmongers, butchers an’ the like. Very big market it is. Bigger than Smithfield – much bigger….”

Noel thought he’d finished and he was trying to frame another question, but Big Fred had more to say.

“…and in the middle of it all; right by this bloody great market, they’ve built a theatre – a bloody huge theatre…    …an’ that’s where Charlie dances…      …I’ve bin there; me an’ the wife…    …We’ve seen ‘im dancin’…     …Our Charlie can dance alright…” he added ruminatively, his mind far, far from Ancoats and the load of bricks.


Then he suddenly turned on Noel – to catch any hint of mockery. “…We’d best get goin’…” he said, starting up the lorry and shifting it into gear. 

Royal Opera House - Covent Garden - London