Davie P

I've been listening to a lot of these two lately, brilliant voices and they're in perfect harmony together.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ad0AAtveWM
 
Full concert from New Orleans.

I agree, after all your years in deciding about Shetland and its future, it appears, according to these threads, it is constantly wrong. Perhaps it is time for the young to be more engaged, if you ask them, they do not get involved because of the stubbornness of the aulf folk.

Because young people are much less likely to vote, express opinions & have their say heard. At the end of the day, they are Shetland's future, you old farts have had your time! 

I think it is a bit of a good idea that young people of Shetland are given the chance to have their say. The councillors have done most of it but now the spotlight shines on the young folk (for good).
 
When I was in school, some of my classmates would often say "why can't Shetland have a bowling alley?" and "why can't Shetland have a theme park?" but now coming to think about it, I now have the say to show my views in my perspective. Those questions were when I was at primary school years ago and today as I am more older I am beginning to think "what's the future for some of our junior high schools?". I do remember when the head of children's services came to the high school and spoke about the AHS's future. The questions asked were so suggestive (as in, not what was suspected to be said) the head just made things into a muddle.

Well, I spoke to Alice today and can confirm there is no SIC money being spent on this project, it is being funded by SNH.  So don't worry Colin, the SIC is not paying anybody's wages for doing this.  The promote shetland contribution "in kind" which folk are getting so worked up about amounted to the loan of their video equipment. There is no office space being used, and none of unlinkedstudents income tax or council tax is being spent on it.  If "back from beyond" had not secured their funding from SNH for this project, the money would have been spent on something else, outside shetland.  I say well done to Alice and Emma for all the work they have put into this, and suggest the detractors watch this video and then decide whether promote shetland should have said:
 
"no, you can't borrow that camera, there is a black hapenny of ghostriders tax invested in it and it would be better if it sat here today unused."
 

"Just because you didn't recognise the names on the website doesn't mean to say others won't recognise them."
 
It was you that said "The majority, if not all, are established". So to become an 'established' artist someone just has to 'recognise' them? Really? In a community as close-knit as Shetland then almost anyone who has ever done anything creative would be considered as an established artist by your definition.
 
"Whether you care to acknowledge it or not, it is a form of advertising."
 
Absolute and utter rubbish!!! You really seem to be a very cynical person. Unless the contributors are hoping to sell something off the back of their involvement I can't see how it could be considered as advertising. Considering the amount of time they must have put in then it would be a pretty inefficient form of advertising anyway. But perhaps you're right and any public display of art or music should be considered as 'advertising' by the artist in question, although that doesn't seem to fit any definition of the word I know of.
 
"We're being told endlessly that the SIC can't afford this, the Scottish Government can't afford this, but this sort of thing can be afforded?"
 
Why don't you take it up with the SIC or the Scottish Government then? I don't know what you hope to achieve by slagging off the project, the contributors and the organisers under an assumed name on a forum where few of the people your comments should be directed at are likely to see it, let alone act on it.
 
"Many of us don't need organised projects to get out and enjoy the scenery.  We survived years ago without such nannyism and I'm sure we can survive again without them."
 
WTF!!! How can the project be considered as 'nannyism'? If you don't want to contribute or take part then don't! As is apparent, many people don't share your views and have enjoyed and been inspired by the project, and I hope many more do in future.
 
 

What a mean-spirited post. I hardly know where to start other than to say almost every point is nonsense.
 
I too have had a look at the website (and very much enjoyed my visit). Re: the participants "The majority, if not all, are established". Really? I've heard of less than half of them. And what's wrong with established artists contributing anyway???
 
"Or why can't they be like other Shetland businesses and be responsible for their own advertising?" 
 
I think it's extremely insulting and ignorant to insinuate that the participants have contributed their time and creations for the sake of free advertising.
 
"Oh look, a lot of paintings of familiar scenes.  Were these painted in the last few hours?  I think not."
 
According to the website, the project was launched in late November - only a month has passed and you're slagging it because paintings weren't done "in the past few hours" What a ridiculous point! I think the number of contributions made thus far shows how well supported the project has been.
 
"Ghostie and I are kicking ourselves for not utilising the rusty satellite dish left behind by previous tenants around here, place it amongst uncut grass down the road, whack on a few car tyres left due to no skips ... and enter it as "art".  Hell, we could even write a poem about it."
 
So why don't you, instead of slagging people that have chosen to do so?
 
"Do I want my income tax and council tax spent on such events?  No, I don't.  Do I mind such funds being spent on providing MP3 players for people in care homes?  That I wouldn't mind."
 
So why don't you do something about it? Take some inspiration from the Back From Beyond folks, pull together some public, private and voluntary support for a project you believe in and organise MP3 players for old folk's homes. It would seem to me to be a more productive and positive thing to do rather than having a go at people who have put so much time and effort into a community project they obviously believe in.

What a mean-spirited post. I hardly know where to start other than to say almost every point is nonsense.
 
I too have had a look at the website (and very much enjoyed my visit). Re: the participants "The majority, if not all, are established". Really? I've heard of less than half of them. And what's wrong with established artists contributing anyway???
 
"Or why can't they be like other Shetland businesses and be responsible for their own advertising?" 
 
I think it's extremely insulting and ignorant to insinuate that the participants have contributed their time and creations for the sake of free advertising.
 
"Oh look, a lot of paintings of familiar scenes.  Were these painted in the last few hours?  I think not."
 
According to the website, the project was launched in late November - only a month has passed and you're slagging it because paintings weren't done "in the past few hours" What a ridiculous point! I think the number of contributions made thus far shows how well supported the project has been.
 
"Ghostie and I are kicking ourselves for not utilising the rusty satellite dish left behind by previous tenants around here, place it amongst uncut grass down the road, whack on a few car tyres left due to no skips ... and enter it as "art".  Hell, we could even write a poem about it."
 
So why don't you, instead of slagging people that have chosen to do so?
 
"Do I want my income tax and council tax spent on such events?  No, I don't.  Do I mind such funds being spent on providing MP3 players for people in care homes?  That I wouldn't mind."
 
So why don't you do something about it? Take some inspiration from the Back From Beyond folks, pull together some public, private and voluntary support for a project you believe in and organise MP3 players for old folk's homes. It would seem to me to be a more productive and positive thing to do rather than having a go at people who have put so much time and effort into a community project they obviously believe in.

I have no idea how many people have visited the website. I was referring to the number of people who have submitted contributions to it.
 
And I have no idea how many people biodoodled, although I know a few families that did. I expect we'll see the results on the website soon.

Hello all, 
 
Here's the video I've made for our Christmas Day swim that we do every year at Sands of Sound. My feet and throat swelled up after this because of how cold it was. Nevertheless, good fun!
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkdK747i8jc
 
If you like it, sharing it would be great! 
 
Cheers
 
 

What a mean-spirited post. I hardly know where to start other than to say almost every point is nonsense.
 
I too have had a look at the website (and very much enjoyed my visit). Re: the participants "The majority, if not all, are established". Really? I've heard of less than half of them. And what's wrong with established artists contributing anyway???
 
"Or why can't they be like other Shetland businesses and be responsible for their own advertising?" 
 
I think it's extremely insulting and ignorant to insinuate that the participants have contributed their time and creations for the sake of free advertising.
 
"Oh look, a lot of paintings of familiar scenes.  Were these painted in the last few hours?  I think not."
 
According to the website, the project was launched in late November - only a month has passed and you're slagging it because paintings weren't done "in the past few hours" What a ridiculous point! I think the number of contributions made thus far shows how well supported the project has been.
 
"Ghostie and I are kicking ourselves for not utilising the rusty satellite dish left behind by previous tenants around here, place it amongst uncut grass down the road, whack on a few car tyres left due to no skips ... and enter it as "art".  Hell, we could even write a poem about it."
 
So why don't you, instead of slagging people that have chosen to do so?
 
"Do I want my income tax and council tax spent on such events?  No, I don't.  Do I mind such funds being spent on providing MP3 players for people in care homes?  That I wouldn't mind."
 
So why don't you do something about it? Take some inspiration from the Back From Beyond folks, pull together some public, private and voluntary support for a project you believe in and organise MP3 players for old folk's homes. It would seem to me to be a more productive and positive thing to do rather than having a go at people who have put so much time and effort into a community project they obviously believe in.

Whose 'WAGES' are you shouting about?

The main funder is Scottish Natural Heritage and the website states that Promote Shetland provide 'in-kind' (i.e. non-cash) support. I'd say that the wider Back From Beyond project certainly does 'promote Shetland' and any resources that might have been allocated to the Bioddodling element of the project certainly isn't proportional to the resentment this thread seems to have generated in some people.

Should the council not fund the promotion of Shetland? The justification for the arguments against getting folk out and about and creative very very weak, as you say, you have no idea of the funding, just that some may have gone towards it. I too get stuff from Promote Shetland, happy to get it as well. It will be money spent well, I have managed to get folk to visit the isles because of the work of various organisations.
The point is though, the volunteers do this stuff for no renumeration, the argument for the fact that payment may have been made for any other expense these volunteers have incurred to promote the isles and encourage the inhabitants to get out and about and provoke thought (even though, negative in cases) can only be for the benefit of folk in the wider community.

Whose 'WAGES' are you shouting about?

I've just had a read through several Facebook discussions about this debacle and the comments section of the Shetland Times and at this moment I genuinely feel a little embarrassed to be a Shetlander.
 
Grown men calling him "Lemon Sissy" and "lemon head" on his Facebook page, numerous racist apologists, a call for the English Defence League to sort him out on the Shetland Times page (thankfully now moderated, but someone allowed it to be published in the first place), people slagging of his work who by their own admission have never read any of it, frothy mouthed attacks of the 'PC Brigade', thinly veiled threats of violence..... Absolutely pathetic. Sad, sad times folks.

I can see both sides of the argument but it seems to me that the level of ignorance displayed by some of those attacking Mr Sissay (and anyone else who may share his opinion on Golliwogs) is only matched by the level restraint shown by those on the other side of the fence.
 
Shetlink is sometimes knocked for anonymity and pointless moaning but this thread seems to be the most reasoned debate on the subject.

As an interesting aside, most folk who I've discussed this with believe that Golliwogs do, at best, have racist connotations. I'd be interested to see the results of a poll on the subject, although the wording of the question would itself be contentious and I have no idea how to start a poll! What do you guys think?

With the greatest respect, I've read your post several times and I genuinely can't fathom what your point is, let alone how you arrived at it. I've read much (most?) of his comments on the subject and I saw no evidence of him accusing Shetlanders or Shetland of being racist.
 
To be honest it seems to me that you're just trying to put words in his mouth.
 
Perhaps you can provide some direct evidence or quotes?

As a complete aside anyone remember this advert?
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB2xYdjt7bE

They're looking for extras for "Shetland" including some small Shetland speaking parts.
 
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151856516756182&set=gm.591967344178700&type=1&theater

I've just had a read through several Facebook discussions about this debacle and the comments section of the Shetland Times and at this moment I genuinely feel a little embarrassed to be a Shetlander.
 
Grown men calling him "Lemon Sissy" and "lemon head" on his Facebook page, numerous racist apologists, a call for the English Defence League to sort him out on the Shetland Times page (thankfully now moderated, but someone allowed it to be published in the first place), people slagging of his work who by their own admission have never read any of it, frothy mouthed attacks of the 'PC Brigade', thinly veiled threats of violence..... Absolutely pathetic. Sad, sad times folks.

I can see both sides of the argument but it seems to me that the level of ignorance displayed by some of those attacking Mr Sissay (and anyone else who may share his opinion on Golliwogs) is only matched by the level restraint shown by those on the other side of the fence.
 
Shetlink is sometimes knocked for anonymity and pointless moaning but this thread seems to be the most reasoned debate on the subject.

As an interesting aside, most folk who I've discussed this with believe that Golliwogs do, at best, have racist connotations. I'd be interested to see the results of a poll on the subject, although the wording of the question would itself be contentious and I have no idea how to start a poll! What do you guys think?

I've just had a read through several Facebook discussions about this debacle and the comments section of the Shetland Times and at this moment I genuinely feel a little embarrassed to be a Shetlander.
 
Grown men calling him "Lemon Sissy" and "lemon head" on his Facebook page, numerous racist apologists, a call for the English Defence League to sort him out on the Shetland Times page (thankfully now moderated, but someone allowed it to be published in the first place), people slagging of his work who by their own admission have never read any of it, frothy mouthed attacks of the 'PC Brigade', thinly veiled threats of violence..... Absolutely pathetic. Sad, sad times folks.

I can see both sides of the argument but it seems to me that the level of ignorance displayed by some of those attacking Mr Sissay (and anyone else who may share his opinion on Golliwogs) is only matched by the level restraint shown by those on the other side of the fence.
 
Shetlink is sometimes knocked for anonymity and pointless moaning but this thread seems to be the most reasoned debate on the subject.

As an interesting aside, most folk who I've discussed this with believe that Golliwogs do, at best, have racist connotations. I'd be interested to see the results of a poll on the subject, although the wording of the question would itself be contentious and I have no idea how to start a poll! What do you guys think?

This makes for worrying reading - http://www.shetnews.co.uk/news/7306-road-crisis-ahead - all the major roads in Shetland hitting "the end of their serviceable life at the same time"

That'll no be cheap!

Has anybody else noticed that "Moor Park" is "Krap Room" backwards?

You seem to be suggesting that people should not teach children about the lineage of golliwogs? Personally I think it is very important to educate young people in such matters.
There are plenty of other toys they can play with and I wouldn't give my kids golliwogs. I don't believe that makes me PC, a "touchy-feely piltock", a "wonderful champion of racial equality" or any of the other insults being throw around here. Likewise, I don't believe anyone who does give their kids a golliwog is automatically a racist. That said, I believe that golliwogs represent historical racism and the facts bare than out.
 
 
I'm sorry, but I find that to be a little hard to swallow. Yes, many 'comedians' were just a product of their time but to say that none of them were racist is stretching it a little.