Skip to main content

That old devil called love

Smoochy-smooch!

It’s Valentine’s Day. Did you remember to get a cutesy teddy holding a heart with the word ‘Love’ on it for that special person?

I expect there are a fair proportion of readers who are having a damn fine grumpy old time today, complaining about how the Americans spoiled a perfectly good Pagan ritual by brainwashing us all into thinking that true love can only be accurately communicated by us purchasing a very big card, writing in it, and then giving it to the bemused object of our affections.

I was amongst your kind, until a frightfully unusual sensation came over me. After I realised that half a packet of Chocolate Chip HobNobs had probably given me a sugar spike so large I was in immediate danger of Diabetes, I did a little research into Valentine’s Day and discovered, to my horror, that for once we can’t blame our chums across the pond.

Valentine of Rome had the extreme misfortune of getting himself martyred somewhere around AD 496, which is particularly bad luck for someone with such a nice name. So unpleasant was it that it took until the 14th Century before anyone thought of linking Valentine in any way with what Barry White would later refer to as ‘Luuuurve’.

Once Chaucer had planted that notion firmly into our collective consciousness (assumingly utilising a cherub with a bow and arrow) we bumbled happily on for another five centuries or so until the ability to print stuff had got it’s inky fingers well and truly around our hearts, and finally started sending each other sugary-sweet cards to proclaim our undying love.

Shockingly, it was actually us Brits that came up with that particular idea, and also the whole chocolates/flowers/cutesy tat thing that has proliferated ever since, filling the card and gift emporiums of our land with red hearts, whilst simultaneously emptying our pockets as soon as the Christmas stuff has hit the bargain bin. Hang your heads in shame. It was your ancestors that did this.

So now the only true winners in all this aren’t those genuinely in love – they already know that, without the insecure need to spend a bundle of cash on something tacky to prove it.

No, the ones with a warm glow are the card and gift companies, who do their market-researched best to make us feel bad if we don’t put our hands in our pockets to prove our love is real.

Fancy a romantic meal for two? Great – you can go to a very busy restaurant, and spend even more than usual on a menu that’s basically the same as any other but has pink hearts on it, whilst a tired looking rose withers next to the romantic candle.

Or go for a really nice meal on another day when it’s quieter, and let that genuinely special person know that you love them, by opening your mouth and actually saying it.

Like you should be the rest of the year anyway.

This post first appeared as my "Thank grumpy it's Friday" column in the North West Evening Mail, on the 14th of February 2014. You can view the version published by the paper here, where the title had "It's" bunged on the front, and "again" at the end.

The only bit that went missing en route to the NWEMs printing presses was the line in brackets about a cherub. Poor cherub.

Without really realising it, my gentle rant about the crassness of Valentine's Day turned into something different; a grumble about people who seem to think one particular day should be special. I happen to think they should all be special if you genuinely love someone.

And yes, I did get my wife a card - even I'm not THAT stupid...

(A forgotten splendid compilation CD from March 04 on the go tonight, featuring a series of rather brilliant mash-ups from the likes of GoHome Productions and Soundhog.)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Malaysian Grand Prix - Vettel hot, but not bothered

Malaysia. It's always hot, and it always rains. Except the 2nd part is no longer true (unless you count the drizzly bit around lap 14). Saturday's qualifying session had highlighted the fact that Red Bull and McLaren seemed well matched on pace, but also that Ferrari were struggling. Whilst Vettel bagged another pole, followed by Hamilton, Webber and Button, Alonso was only 5th, and Massa 7th, with Nick Heidfeld an excellent 6th on the grid between the two red cars. At this point, I would like to break momentarily for a small rant: How many times do I have to say Heidfeld is good? Why wasn't he given a top drive years ago? WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?! ARE YOU BLIND!!!?? Ahem. The Hispanias somehow managed to a) turn up b) remember to bring cars c) get both of them on the track d) actually get both of them within 107%. Pretty remarkable really. Oh, and it didn't rain. Race day looked a more likely candidate for a drop of the wet stuff. The start was exciting, with

I know I'll regret this...

For @Feisty_Onion @BroughtonLass @LizWestmorland Me... before the grumpiness set in. Have a great weekend.

Senna bags Willy drive?

The great thing about F1 rumours is that they change every 5 minutes. Just last week it was looking like Barrichello might be back in at Williams, as new engines, tech staff and a general reshuffle would mean they needed someone who actually knew what they were doing in an F1 car. Which rules out Maldonado, obviously. Now it looks like Senna might be about to get a seat with the team where his Uncle lost his life. I'm sure Bruno's mum must be delighted. I don't hold with all this superstitious mumbo-jumbo though, and with the extraordinary level of safety in modern F1 cars, Bruno should be pretty safe. There is one significant problem with Williams signing him though - and this is going to be a bit unpopular I suspect - Bruno isn't very good. Yes, he put in a couple of reasonable performances with Renault, but Nick Heidfeld (ah... Nick and his lovely beard...) would have been able to do likewise, has he not been dropped. And then they dropped Senna too. Thi