Clara 'Oswin' Oswald

If you're reading this and my view of my reader is anywhere near accurate, then you've already watched the Dr Who episode "The Bells of St. John" (that's today's for those of you to stupid to think (which is of course non of you, but I have to be prepared for muggles to come along now and again)) If you haven't then go fucking watch it! Both to avoid the spoilers and so what I'm saying makes sense... Ok are we all caught up now? Good, let's proceed.
No wait, one more thing before we do. Do you think because Matt Smith is the youngest Doctor ever that someone high up decreed that the companions must be younger and hotter than ever before? I mean when they unveiled a leggy redhead in a policewoman's uniform I was pretty certain that was not to be topped, but then, well... this happened:

I mean seriously! She is properly hot. The only reason Jenna Louise Coleman is not on "the list" is because she's on both my father's and brother's, if there was ever something that you shouldn't share with your family, it's list entries (find the post "the Lovell list" to explain that)
Anywho, now I actually am going to get to the actual timey-wimey, nerdy-wordy things I came here to say. To avoid (or possibly create) confusion We'll be using this system from here onwards:
Clara=Victorian
Oswin=Dalek
Jenna=This episode (and series, but that's not relevant yet) (yes I know that's the actress's name but what other option do I have? "Oswald"? No, that's an old man's name! Don't be so silly)
The most obvious question the writers have made us ask is "Are Clara, Jenna and Oswin all the same person?" which obviously leads on to the more interesting "If yes, how is she resurrecting?" or "If no, what connects them?"
I know I came here to express my theories and thoughts about these questions, but I can't answer the first of them. She's met the Doctor for the first time 3 times now, but she never knew him beforehand. So this means that surely they're not one person being resurrected, otherwise Oswin and Jenna would remember the meeting Clara had with him wouldn't they? So they must be different people surely?
However, it seems that knowledge is passed between them. Clara is in the past and not a genius, Oswin is in the future and she's able to hack a whole dalek prison at will. Jenna, at the start of the episode, knows nothing about computers, she then gets uploaded, downloaded and all the other sorts of loaded (that sounds rude now I write it) and becomes a total screaming genius but modest and a tiny bit sexy, much like Oswin is. That implies some sort of consistent conciousness that allows knowledge to be passed down on a linear timeline. So maybe they are the same person but why is knowledge passed and not memories?
Besides, there are a few subtle differences between the 3 of them. Oswin's first name was, obviously, Oswin, Clara's middle name was Oswin, but then Jenna didn't recognise the name. How can a name flit in and out of the timeline for a person/people?
Let's be honest, I've answered nothing have I? I've just listed all the options. Well to quote Neil deGrasse Tyson and Jean Valjean "Sometimes, one must be content to love the questions themselves." "The truth is given to us all in our time, in our turn." So put the kettle on, put your feet up, and watch the pretty woman and the mad man in a box.

Strangers on the Internet

This is going to rambley, I can feel it. Try and stick with me on this... Yes of course rambley is a real word, why would you even question that? Anyway, to business.
I'm not a fan of naming fandoms, in fact I'm not a fan of the word fandom itself, but I concede that they do make things neater. Especially on (the main focus of this post) twitter, where everything is neatly condensed into tiny snippets of  information. It does make life easier to just look and see Belieber, Directioner, and all that other shite and just sit there going "nope nope, oh wait! Nope!" I'm sure plenty of them are good and interesting people deep down... well some of them, maybe, but if they care enough about awful music to make it that obvious, I'm not going to dig that far before giving up. Anywho, I came here to extol the virtues of these people (Fandom people, not beliebers) not complain.
I see people complaining about boring and generic tweets on a daily basis, but I never see the original problem. I got bored of pointing out that you only see boring shit from the people you follow, if you stop following them it all goes away. Related to this is people who feel obligated to follow everyone they know in the real world, I hate most of the people I know in the real world! I can see why people would want to avoid real world people on the internet, I only occasionally have to deal with Kelly questioning my... *sigh* fine I'll say it, Helenaist nature. If I had that shit on a daily basis I'd do what I know at least one other person I know has, get another account to be me on, and just be Marshall on the one I have now. I say at least one as the point of the second account is it stays away from people from the real world, so maybe there are plenty of them are out there.
Right, we may as well get to the point in the title now shall we? I follow 127 people on twitter and I'm followed by 102 (at least while I'm writing this) only 30 people (well 29, 30 accounts) are on both lists. This is because I follow people who I find interesting, whether someone follows me or not has no impact on my choice to follow them or not, even if they get pissy about me not following back. About 6 of those people make up well over 3/4 of my interactions. I've only met 2 of them and can only tell you what 3 of them look like, that is because the other 3 all have pictures of Helena Bonham Carter as their icons (The other one I don't know is Katie... We don't talk about why she's in my interactions). Now finally I get to  make a genuine point! It doesn't matter that I may never meet these people, that isn't important. We share interests (no, not just Helena, not always) and the whole point of twitter is to connect to people you share interests with, not people you know. I spend a ridiculous amount of time on twitter and essentially none on facebook, because I'm much more interested in strangers I share interests with, than I am in acquaintances I don't give a shit about.
Basically, there is no reason to complain about what people tweet. There are so many accounts out there that you can have a perfectly full timeline that all interests you. Just unfollow the boring people and follow interesting strangers in their place.

Sometimes, I Just Don't Get People

Earlier today Josh left one of the study rooms at school by (according to all sources) jumping on a table and heading, as the crow flies, straight out of the room. Now I wasn't there so all I have is information gathered afterwards but apparently the issue he had taken was with Megan "existing" (that was his one word answer when I asked him what she was doing wrong)
Now I know this is probably a lot like the Joan Rivers thing the other day, I'd be much less concerned if it was other people involved, but nevertheless, what sort of a problem is existing? Everyone does it, literally everyone, so that is no reason to rage at any one person. Thinking about it, a disproportionate amount of the people I know have a talent for inexplicable rage, this one though is noteworthy for the sheer sustained passion of it all. Generally episodes like these (be they mine, Josh's, Jonny's or someone else's) are either a massive sudden outburst over one specific (generally minor) offence, or a sort of simmering anger (normally explainable, sometimes not)
However it was demonstrated on the bus (in a rather entertaining manner) that this was something spectacularly different. I'll spare you the details but every time I removed my headphones (they were in to prevent me arguing, I'm hardly the perfect audience for an anti-Megan rant) I was greeted by some more (in some cases rather creative) abusive ranting, even a random thing like a child outside the bus or being in Seaton would somehow swing back to the same angry point. I was actually quite impressed, I don't think I could keep being that angry for more than a few minutes. Yet the only reasoning I could get for it was that Megan exists, just like I do and Josh does and everyone you've ever met does. I don't know what the real reason for Josh's anger was (we all know it wasn't "existing") but I hope Megan continues to do it, just for the entertainment it provides.
To justify writing this (I really just wanted to share a story of crazy anger) I'm going to try and crowbar a point on the end here. It's perfectly ok to hate someone, even to the point of table vaulting to get away from them. Just try to have a reason for it, you can't hate everyone, so target your anger at things that shouldn't be accepted, not just existing.

Brilliance and Beauty

I'd told myself for a long time that I wasn't going to write this post, but after the blasphemy that was this Monday's tutor it was essentially inevitable. The fact that Megan is currently tapping away at her keyboard for the exact same reason I am was just the trigger that set me off. You know exactly how I feel about Helena Bonham Carter so now you just have to sit back and I will explain why this is and, more importantly, why you should feel that way too. I've known who Helena is for as long as I can remember and been in love with her since the Order of the Phoenix came out in 2007, incidentally one of the worst Potter films but the one that introduced two of the best characters in cinema, Bellatrix (obviously) and Luna. Anyway, we're not here to talk magic, but rather about this magical woman. (see what I did there? Good wasn't it? Oh fine we can just move on)

My first point is so blindingly obvious it even goes in the title, she is bloody beautiful isn't she? I realised in chemistry the other day that if you doubled my age I'd still be a decade younger than she is, but at 46 she is still one of the most attractive people on this planet. Certainly when you only look at people over 40 there isn't really anyone to contest my point. What makes Helena so brilliant is that she's unique, a bloody rare quality when so many celebrities seem to be pure carbon copies of one another, I know there are other celebrities that stand out from the crowd but no one does it quite so well as the "corset queen" (a title I'll get to later). Take awards ceremonies as a nice easy example, as soon as I say that you can get a pretty clear idea in your head of what an average actress would be wearing. Fancy but fairly simple dress, certainly shoes that match at least but not Helena.  You might argue that it's a desperate bid for attention like the sort of thing lady gaga would do, but I don't think so because she always looks almost uncomfortable when photographed in public, like she'd rather be avoiding the attention and that's why she isn't dressed up in the same way as everyone else. In photo-shoots and when acting she always seems far more relaxed than she ever seems as herself, so I don't think she dresses like that to try and stand out, I think she dresses like that because she is truly unique and lets be honest with ourselves here: normal is boring, unique is sexy. Right I think 282 words just about covers beauty enough to get by, if I don't stop now I might go on forever. So lets get on to why she's so much more than a pretty face.
Part of the blasphemy I mentioned at the start of this post is essentially "Helena Bonham Carter plays one role through all her films" now I agree the two examples, Lovett and Thenardier, have quite a bit in common but take more than 15 seconds to think about it and you'll see how ridiculous a statement that is. In fact I don't even need words to deal with it, just a picture of a few of the roles she's played will do, you don't even need to recognise them all, just see that they're clearly quite different. There's a possibly imaginary psychopath, between the queen mother and a chimp. The same role? Far from it.

Roles like Mrs Lovett may be what people expect from Helena now but they are a far cry from what made her famous and gave her the nickname I mentioned earlier. Roles like Olivia and Ophelia in adaptations of Shakespeare, as well as things like Elizabeth in Frankenstein (none of which feature above) are all the sort of "Prim Edwardian" style characters that previously defined her. She said she wanted to shock people and if you'd watched her carer from the start (obviously I didn't, I was -10 when she started making films) I think you'd have experienced a fair deal of shock over the course of it. Unfortunately I don't think there are many roles left that will give her the chance to shock people any more, she's covered such a ridiculously wide range that nothing would be a surprise in the future. Of course she could always act badly, that would be pretty shocking to me at least. I've seen 15 films which have a credit for Helena Bonham Carter, all of them were good. I know that only covers 1/5 of the films she's in but I can't think of anyone else who's so consistently good across so many genres and roles. 
A range that greatly exceeds that of Tim Burton, who is a brilliant director don't get me wrong, but there are people who insist that Helena is famous because of Tim. There is no other way of putting it, that's just pain bullshit. Helena and Tim met in 2001 while filming Planet of the Apes. By this point Helena ha appeared in 41 films across 18 years. Working with Tim has been a significant part of her recent career, but even since 2011 she's been in Harry Potter, Great Expectations and Les Miserables, none of which involved Tim Burton, all of which were very successful and the two I've seen were both brilliant. So Helena Bonham Carter is definitely not Tim Burton's "wife and actress". She isn't even his wife, they're an odd pair like that, but like I said, odd trumps normal any day.
Ok it's coming up to 11 o'clock so I'll leave this here for now. Let me know if I've missed anything, or if you disagree with anything I've said let me know. I'll leave you with one (more if I ever work out the way to make photos behave on blogger) of my all time favourite photos of Helena, aren't I good to you?

Power to the Papal

Today it was announced that we will see something at the end of the month that hasn't happened since 1945; the worlds most powerful Nazi is giving up his power. I'm taking of course about Joseph Ratzinger, pope since 2005, who is the first pope to step down from the post since 1415 (you'd think he could hold on for 2 more years for neatness sake) blaming old age and ill health (the ill health is probably punishment from god for being at the head of the worlds largest paedophile facilitating organisation.) Of course at this point you'll be thinking "So an old man is retiring, what's your point Marshall?" It is this: is there any point in replacing Ratzinger?
I'm not saying we get rid of religion, we should do of course but I know that some people are just incapable of growing up enough to stop believing in fairy tales. Organised religion on the other hand, a religion that has it's own UN recognised state, that's something else entirely. I fail to see any need for the pope, or frankly the church. If you want to blame your problems on the will of your imaginary friend then go ahead, but do you really need an international ring of tax avoiders, paedophiles, homophobes and racists to tell you how to be a good person? It's time we do away with the church and live good lives because it's right, not because we are compelled to under threat of eternal damnation.
In fact lets go further than that. Let's take this resignation as a sign from the pope's boss. Just like the resignation of 1415, this is the herald of a new age in human society. A time when we can tear down the ancient institutions that take so much from the people and give nothing real back to us. Religion, monarchy, bigotry, these are things that hold society back from development. The world is changing faster now than it has for centuries, now is the perfect time to prune away the old useless branches at the top of the tree. No one is truly free until we live in a land where all people answer in equal measure to the government and that government answers in turn to its people. Yet as it is there is so much power invested in mystical beings and arbitrary powers with no accountability.
If we want to move on we need to trim the fat, prune away the wasteful medieval structures of society and replace them with justifiable, fair, democratic practices. If someone wants to be head of state they should require the will of the people to take that post, no one should be born into power. If organised religion must continue, treat it and tax it like any other organisation and never hold the will of the church above the law. These are fair requests for a fair society, a true republic free from state religion.
This is not an issue anyone should remain silent on, we all have a voice to demand liberty from those who govern us, to declare our freedom from those who would tie our hands and silence our words. Your country belongs to its people, not their government, never believe otherwise. Demand democracy, demand liberty, demand the freedom that is your right as a human.

Now - Paramore

It's ok, it's still me here, you haven't wandered into Megan's not daily music blog, but music is today's topic, more specifically the single from Paramore's 4th album that comes out in April. I recently got back into Paramore so I obviously began paying attention to the news about the new album (I'd know it was coming out for a long time, I just hadn't cared before) The reason I'm writing an entire post on a single song is simple: I don't know what my opinion of it is, so I'd like to see what other people think about it to help me. Obviously step 1 in helping me here would be hearing the song, so here you go.

I'm literally just playing that on a loop as I write this and I have to say, the first 15 seconds are bloody awful, it is one of the most irritating intros to a song I'll voluntarily listen to. Then the "Now-ow-ow-ow..." is used throughout the song and that's probably my main complaint about the song. I dislike the "Don't try to take this from me" bits even more, seriously that's just... no, but they only come into it twice (only 4 lines, not a massive issue) so I can cope.

Other than that I have very little to really complain about. It sounds properly different to all their old stuff but still somehow, in the back of my head, really reminds me of one of their previous songs, but I cant think which, especially around the lines "starting over, head back in" if an old Paramore fan can see what I mean and tell me which song I'm thinking of I will be forever grateful.

Aside from the previously mentioned exceptions, I think Hayley sounds better than ever and the band sounds just as good as a 3 piece as it did with 5 members. In fact, scrap what I said at the start, once you get past the intro it is a damn good song and I'm sure the album with have some songs that are even better. So while I still want to hear your opinion I think I've got a hold on mine now. Now is a good song that just has a few parts I don't like, I'll probably buy the album and I'm sure I'll love it as much as the other 3, besides the intro to this song won't be used for the others will it? So I'll probably like most of them more than this.

So there we go, proof that over-thinking a song into a blog post can fix the indecision you're having about it, so this was worth it for that if nothing else. Now you're done reading this leave a comment just I know how you feel, if you like it tell me why, if you don't, do the same (don't just put "It's shit" you'll sound stupid)

Right, that's all for now, I'm off to listen to the rest of Paramore's songs, I'll see you peasants later.

Nikola Tesla

Lets just be clear about a few simple truths before we begin. Nikola Tesla was the greatest scientist to have ever lived, if his life wasn't plagued by the lesser minds of business men like the cretinous Tomas Edison then Tesla would be a household name as the father of modern science. Tesla did things alone in the 19th century that teams of scientists cannot replicate to this day. He was quite possibly the smartest person in history and yet he is greatly underrated by many people, the same people who hold up the insane notion that Edison was inventor of the light bulb and father of the modern electrical era. If you are one of these people, take a seat and let me explain everything wrong with your views on scientific history.
Lets start with the common but insane idea that Tomas Edison was the inventor of the light bulb and therefore the man responsible for the electrical age we live in. Besides religion I can't think of anything so commonly accepted and yet so far from reality, Edison did nothing more than work out how to market and sell the ideas that were pioneered by 22 men before him, he invented nothing. Edison also worked hard to prevent to development of(amongst other things) : alternating current, radar, X-rays and wireless electricity. 3 of these are important parts of the modern word Edison was supposed to have helped usher in and one has still not been re-invented, all 4 were the products of the great mind of a certain Serbian who isn't officially credited with their invention because he let other people use build on his work without patenting them to hold back development by other people.
Just a few other things we wouldn't have without Tesla: hydroelectric power, transistors (and therefore computers), remote controls, neon lights, modern motors, wireless communications and radios. I honestly can't think of anyone who has given more to the world than Tesla did. If his work was backed for it's merit and not based on the profit it could generate, then we'd be living with the benefits of Tesla's genius in so many ways. Not least is the wireless power I mentioned earlier, Tesla developed a method of transferring power safely through the atmosphere and was in the process of building a tower that could have provided free electricity to the entire world. Then his funding was cut off, people with money don't like other people having free things so the project was scrapped.
Then, after all that, all his amazing work and every genius invention. Tesla died alone and penniless, shut in a hotel room talking to an imaginary bird. It says far too much about the world that possibly the greatest mind humanity has ever known was lost to the world in that way, I'll leave this post with the same thing I said about Eponine: Tesla deserved so much but ended up dying with nothing.