Response to 'Christian teen camps are wicked, innit'

I've just read an article on the Guardian website written by a guy named, Thomas Prosser.  I did wonder when reading it whether he had some form of biased, already formed, opinion on the subject of religion...and he does. Clicking on his name, his description is, 'Dr. Thomas Prosser is a lecturer in sociology at Trinity College, Dublin. He has spoken at the World Atheist Convention on the subject of children and religion.'  There lies what I had assumed.  Just a quick jibe, but a convention which has "World" in the title would suggest something of a massive attendance... the venue they hosted it at can cater between 10-400 people.  A conference which is for the UK, for UK Christians, for UK Christian students, for UK Christian students in a leadership role (specifically) sees an attendance of around 1000.  Just saying.

Anyway, onto the article he wrote.  And let me just say, I have not just come back from a conference so the buzz of being away is not present, but it just so happens that I'm in a reflective mood.  I shall continue. The article is very generalised, first and foremost.  I didn't read anything about people he had interviewed (if he interviewed any?), and instead he seems to have attended (or perhaps just been told about) the conference, Soul Survivor.  He mentions the three chord songs, fair dos, Christian songs usually contain three chords, but famous atheist John Lennon in the majority of his songs used three chords.  Using comments in a derogatory fashion when it applies to both sides is just an easy way to divert attention from their own flawed theory to try and make a dent in a growing faith.  It may gain a few smirks from other atheists, but those few smirks won't really gain you anything of significance.

I have not been to Soul Survivor myself, but I have been to Christian conferences.  Yes, sometimes the music, the atmosphere, and the emotion are incredible and give you an amazing buzz, but who's to say that you've lost your mind?  Perhaps, you have pent up emotion and you're in an atmosphere that is so open and honest that you can show your emotion.  You haven't lost your mind, but you're expressing what's on your mind.

I've never been to a conference where altar calls and contracts have been used.  I think the author did a fairly bad job in researching 'teen camps' as there are loads more to speak of.  Altar calls, in my opinion, would pressurise people.  I've been to a places where if you would like to give your heart to Christ, just go and see the speaker after the session has finished.  It's a personal commitment.  I wouldn't be comfortable beginning that close, personal, walk with God, with a thousand people behind me.  It's not for me.  The author says that the youth accept an altar call, or sign a contract or whatever...but these are not legally binding documents.  Once the buzz dies down (which it does - you go home, you get stuck into your lives, etc), that person can very easily just say "It's not for me".  They aren't cast out, or imprisoned, or killed.  They are given an opportunity which they can accept or reject.  It's up to them.

The author writes, 'young people have a right to choose their religious beliefs without being subjected to strategies that emotionally exploit them.'  Of course they do.  However, I'm sure the author would like to back up his statement and interview a few people who attended and ask them whether they felt emotionally exploited, or whether they felt a true, genuine feeling of hope.

However, once the buzz dies down, and that person reflects on the conference they've attended, reflects on what they've heard, reflects on their lives, and they go back to school or college, and they think "This is for me".  They then continue their lives as a Christian, with faith in Jesus dying for their sins and restoring their relationship with God.  It's always a personal relationship with God.  No contract will take away or add to that.  If it were me, I'd take away the use of the contract, but I'd have a form saying 'If you'd like to keep in contact, write your email'.  It's a personal commitment, but we have other Christians around us to encourage and support us.

Finally, just to end.  The author has gone out of his way to show this conference as some sort of cult with words like 'threaten', 'initiate' and 'practices'.  I'm a Christian, and if a conference was sold like this, I wouldn't go.  Youngsters are threatened with divine judgment.  They are initiated into the world of charismatic Christian practices, apparently.   Please let me unpack his attempts of describing the Christian faith.

God created a perfect world.  Absolutely perfect.  There was no death, there was no pain, there were no tears.  Everything was beautiful and perfect.  He created humans too, and gave us free will to look after the world and to be in a perfect relationship with the God who created us, and everything else.  However, Adam and Eve took for granted that free will, and wanted to be God, thus rejecting their Creator.  They live their lives for themselves, and rebel against God day by day, and we continue to live in this world where politician upon politician think they can make the world perfect, and they fail.  God cares about humanity, and God cares about what choice we've made seriously, and calls us to account for our actions.  God pulls away from us, giving us what we want which is a life where we are in charge.  But, as God is perfect, the source of life, and where everything good comes from, God gives us what we want and pulls away, meaning that death and Hell remain.  The author of the article says that youngsters are threatened, no, they are warned of the situation which humans asked for.

However, God loves us.  He loves his Creation, and he loves each and every one of us.  Instead of sitting back and allowing humanity to suffer the consequences of their own actions.  God, in his great mercy, sent his divine son Jesus into the world to become a man.  To walk the very same earth we stand on today.  Jesus didn't rebel against God, he led a perfect life.  Jesus was God in human form, therefore, the only person who could be our substitute.  God sent himself, in human form, to pay for the rebellion and rejection we had done to him.  This was a perfect payment for us, so we no longer face our own fate of Hell.  Jesus' death and resurrection offer us new life, now and forever.  We don't have to be rebels any longer, as God wants us to accept his amazing gift, and call us friends.  We are completely pardoned.  We can either choose to accept God's gift of rescue, or we can choose to continue towards a life, and death, without God.

Remember the author said youngsters were threatened?  We aren't threatened with anything.  We're either given a way out, or to continue on the path we've chosen for ourselves.  It's a bit rude of us to want to continue our lives for ourselves, rejecting God's gift that is right there for us, and yet complain that there is a Hell and it's God's fault we're going there.  No.  We rejected God, and God pulled away as we wanted, leaving a Godless death (Hell) for us.  He loves us, and paid the sacrifice for us, and gave Himself in human form, so we could have a restored relationship with him so we don't have to have a Godless death.  This is amazing news.  We've been given a second chance!  This is why at conferences if you see people with raised hands, maybe crying, it's because we've been given a chance of rescue.  We don't have to face Hell, as God has rescued us.  Youngsters aren't initiated into anything... I've never had an initiation where I've had to raise my hands, clap three times, spin around, or whatever you do at initiations.  You get emotional because you remember just how great a gift we have been given, we've done nothing to deserve it, and yet God gave everything so we could have everything.

Mr Prosser, you may think that you have discovered some amazing insight into these teenage camps, but you've tainted what you've heard and been told with your own opinions and made it into something it isn't.  I would like to challenge Mr Prosser to interview some people that went to Soul Survivor and see what they feel about the conference, and whether his claims would stand true, or whether he'd discover there's more to the conference than three chords and going to bed before midnight.

Pantomimes - I'll marry the Princess Tamara...today!

You know what's coming when you see the first advertisement for 'Cinderella', or 'Peter Pan', or 'Jack and the Beanstalk', or 'Sleeping Beauty', or 'Snow White' with a brightly coloured background, and a vaguely recognisable face smiling at you.  It's Panto Season.

Deep down.  Deep deep deep deep down. I have a love for the eccentric advertisements and the popular way of providing Z-list celebrities with some spending money for Christmas.  But on the surface, I just love the horrific cultural references to whatever has been on in the news mixed with timeless classics such as naming the female love interest Tamara, just so the joke... "I'm going to marry the Princess Tamara" - "What you're marrying the Princess tomorra? That's awfully soon" - and then at the end, 'I'm going to marry the Princess Tamara...today!"  It's horrible, but yet, it's all part of a panto.  It's a little like a Christmas cracker...the bad jokes are all part of the fun...with a decent joke, crackers wouldn't be that fun or as stimulating.

I've been to a fair few pantos in my day.  My mum's birthday falls just before Christmas, and she loves pantos, so every year my family would take to a theatre to watch one.  I enjoyed the theatrics, the story, the 'He's behind you!' elements of the panto when I was younger.  I enjoy pantos now for the adult jokes (not X rated jokes, but jokes to entertain the parents), the celebrities, and the pure silliness of seeing people in a panto.

If you haven't been to a panto, go.  If you have, you may feel a hatred against them, or you may love them.  But, I think it's an experience we should all have in our memory.  So, go if you can...and if not, there's always next year....just look out for the brightly coloured adverts around the middle of November/early December time.

My Cycling Story.

My parents ensured that each of their children would be able to ride a bike.  In order to do this, they followed these guidelines...

a. Buy a bike that the child likes and will enjoy to ride.
b. Buy and attach stabilisers.
c. Take child to grassy field nearby on a regular basis.

With stabilisers, you don't fall off.  You feel like you've achieved this mighty accomplishment...possibly a feeling greater than whoever invented the wheel or fire felt.

Without stabilisers, you fall off...to begin with.  We were going on a Sunday afternoon stroll, and whilst on 'The Cut' (and old railway line) my stabilisers fell off.  It was on rocky terrain...my wheels didn't stand a chance.  My dad encouraged me to pick my bike up, and that grown ups don't use stabilisers.  We went to a nearby grassy field (see guideline 3), and it had a small grassy mound which we walked up.  I got on my bike, my dad pushed me down, and at the bottom I fell off.  Gutted.  We tried a number of occasions, but after feeling like a failure...I decided I didn't want to ride a bike.  Who needs it anyway.  My dad (taking the second part of the third guideline into account) got us back on the bike, and eventually I started riding a bike for myself.

Who knew it would be the start of such a rollercoaster of a relationship?

When I was around 7/8, I was cycling down my street with my other friends.  I didn't notice that a particularly large stone was sat in the middle of the road (a car would have been ok to drive over it, but my bike...no).  My bike struck the stone, and stopped...as I continued to fly over the handlebars.  I went head first into the concrete followed by the rest of me.  Not exactly sure what happened after that.  I woke up (I assume I got knocked out from my little detour to the tarmac.) to see a paramedic shining a light in my eye and talking about her chicken called Lucky.  Again, I can only remember bits and pieces, but I had a toy dalmatian at the time which I had named Lucky...perhaps this was the reason for her ice breaker.  I woke up again (probably just fell asleep at this point) to a big bearded doctor shining a light in my eyes and asking me how many fingers he was holding up....think I got a couple wrong, but he kept moving his hand...I blame that.  Anyway, I ended up with concussion, a graze on my forehead and had to have my arm in a sling (not sure why now as it wasn't broken or anything).  The docs said had I not been wearing my helmet, my injuries would have been a lot worse.  Since then, I've always worn my helmet.

A couple of years later, quite close to the same place as the previous accident spot, I tried to cycle up onto the lowered part of the curb...however, I was attempting to do it sideways.  Somehow, I ended up on the floor and the ambulance arrived as I may have been knocked out again...I tend to hit my head I figure.  And, this is when I realised my bike and I would never have a good future.  I grew taller and needed a new bike...so said goodbye to my blue BMX and got a brand new red bike - unfortunately, it's not the bike that causes the accidents, it's me...I discovered.

I was up in the Lake District doing some mountain biking with my youth club and after a long cycle up, it was time to come down.  I should have known at this point that pedalling when going down accelerates you at an immense speed.  I should have seen the loose stones on the floor.  I should have seen the sheep poo mixed with some form of fluid on the ground.  I should have seen the people at the bottom.  I had to slow down...I couldn't work out how.  When I tried to brake, the stones were preventing me from slowing down slowly...and as I tried to slow down,  the poo/liquid cocktail splashed up in my face...as I was nearing the crowd of ramblers, I knew I had to stop so prepared myself to jump off and started to tilt...but suddenly, another one of the girls on the trip cycled up behind me (she had the same problem), hit the side of my bike causing my bike to stop somehow (no idea how), but I looked behind me and found her on the floor with her jeans ripped.  Thankfully, that's all that happened - it could have been a lot worse.

Most recently, however, was on my daily cycle ride to work.  My laces got caught in the gear chain, and as my laces were double knotted, the lace did not untie as the chain turned, so my lace was being pulled closer and closer to the chain causing my right foot to become, pretty much, void.  I thought I had to tilt to my free foot on the left side, but by then it was too late...I was able to slow down enough so I would just fall...instead of a moving fall (I know how to prevent injuries now).  My left leg hit the pedal (which left a bruise), and I had slight marks and bruises on my right arm where I fell - thankfully again, I landed on the grassy/rocky side of the path...had it been my left foot, it would have been rocky.  I untied my lace from the chain, and continued on my journey.  When I arrived at work, I was somewhat shaken as it had completely jolted my system.

If you need any last minute advice when preparing for a bike fall...gimme a quick text, and I'll let you know how best to complete it without injury.

US Road Trip

This has been one of my dreams for years...to fly to New York (and spend a week there checking out the sites etc), then hire a car and drive to California.

So are you going to go in a straight line there?

No way.  If this trip happens, I would like to go to visit many places in the south including going down to Miami (right at the bottom of Florida), Georgia (to see the famous lake from Sweet Home Alabama), Nashville (home of country music), Amarillo, Las Vegas, Grand Canyon, then spend a few days/week in California doing all the touristy things over there.

Is this actually going to happen?

I've even bought a Michelin map of the US, usually this is a sign of pro-activity for me.  I've checked out car rental companies, and found rentals to be quite good price wise! And the cost of petrol (or gaaaas, over there) is also a lot cheaper than it is in England.

Who are you going with?

At the moment, it's just me.  However, it would be a lot cheaper, more fun, less tiring...if someone came with. My mum wouldn't mind coming, however, as she's married to my dad, it would be wrong to leave without him.  And I *really* don't want to do my dream road trip...with my parents.  Therefore, if anyone would like to re-enact Thelma and Louise with me (without the dramatic ending - I hope to make it back to England afterwards), let me know.

What are the requirements for this trip?

You've got to be fun.  You've got to have a driving licence...I'm not wanting to drive the entire way, therefore sharing the driving would be delightful.  You've got to want to be a tourist some days, and then be ok to see sights quickly (as it is a road trip...destinations in the middle won't have much viewing time), take a smiling picture, then leave...maybe buy an ice cream and souvenirs, or if it's a beach, hang out there.

Anything else?

Have some great driving music.

Final thought?

This is going to be my trip of a lifetime...and if I can save enough, I would love to do this trip either next summer or the following one.  I need this trip to happen soon, otherwise it'll never happen.  It's going to be epic.

Most Cringeworthy Non-Christian Argument Ever,,,

I'm just watching some standups at The Comedy Store on TV, and a comedian came on...he's Scottish, I've seen him before, and I can't remember his name.

Anyway, he came on and told us that he attended a Christian conference in Hyde Park. There was a stall set up saying 'Free Toastie for all of God's children'. This guy goes up and asks for a toastie, and is asked whether he is a Christian. The comedian replies, 'If I'm not, does that mean I don't get a toastie? Cos that's not very Christian.'

Grrr! That last comment is a comment that really gets on my nerves. It's often used, in my experience, by non-Christians wanting to get a cheap laugh around others. I've never heard it said to me in a one on one conversation, unless there is someone in earshot...but otherwise I haven't. In this case, we don't know if the guy at the stall would have given this guy a toastie or not...it would be nice to think that the event would have been a great evangelistic opportunity...then, he says that before the Christian guy can make an informed decision. And in that moment, instead of thinking evangelism, he was thinking, I've got to appear to be a good Christian in front of this non-Christian.

You could say that to any Christian, and they would be right - Christians are not able to stop sinning once they accept Jesus into their lives...but with the Holy Spirit's help, we try to glorify God through our every action because we love Him. It's a cheap blow to say to a Christian, "that's not very Christian" because that just enhances our struggle as then we are accepting their judgment of us, and feeling guilty for the thing we've done, or haven't done. When actually, we should only care about one opinion. God's opinion. We should be seeking to please Him, not people.

MTV Movie Awards 2011

Last night, I saw on twitter that the MTV Movie Awards were top trending. That reminded me of my post from last year (cast back through my posts to see it), at the time I was very bored as I was jobless and bored. Now this year, I missed the main event but I do have a job! And I have just looked at the results - and I am not surprised. I would have been surprised had the actual best nominees won, but there you go...if you're a Twilight fan, of course you would vote for Twilight, even if it wasn't the best film out of the options.

Best Film apparently was Twilight: Eclipse. I would have said Inception....with The Social Network coming in at a close second. I have seen all five nominees for this category, and for the sake of this blog, The Black Swan and Harry Potter 7A were the other nominees. In terms of acting, script and CGI - Inception wins as it has all three. Eclipse has pretty good CGI, but acting wise, Kristen Stewart is a try hard and doesn't quite hit the nail on the head, and the script, I'm not too fussed - it's a weird story. The Social Network has brilliant CGI, scriptwork and acting - but the CGI in comparison to Inception? There's no contest. Harry Potter 7 - acting was bad as usual (apart from some great older ones), CGI is pretty good compared to HP2 (the last one I watched), and scripting with the bad acting, it didn't work for me. Inception should have won.

Best Male Performance....you have three guesses. No, two. Scrap that...it was Robert Pattinson - you didn't need two guesses as it was that obvious. Clearly more people are on Team Edward than Team Jacob as R-Patz beat Taylor Lautner to this award. I would have opted for Jesse Eisenberg personally. The other nominees for best actor were Daniel Radcliffe (HAHAHAHAHAHAHA - this must have been a joke - good one MTV), and Zac Efron. Definitely Jesse Eisenberg. When it says Best Male Performance, it's difficult to compare the others with Jesse Eisenberg as their acting styles were completely different in each film....or maybe Eisenberg was just leagues better. No idea. That was my personal view - and again, for the record, I have seen all five performances.

Best Female Performance. Eurgh. None. Kristen Stewart won....come on. MTV needs to show it has some credibility. Other performances were from Jennifer Aniston, Emma Watson, Natalie Portman and Emma Stone. I have seen all but Jennifer Aniston's...but from every other film with her in - I can safely say, no. Natalie Portman won the Academy Award for Best Actress, not that she should have as according to recent allegations, she only performed about 5% of the dancing in the film - and the film was weird and very uncomfortable watching. Emma Stone in Easy A was an alright performance, but from the whole year? Seriously? Are these the only performances MTV can come up with? Ellen Page should have been in there...and even Angelina Jolie in Salt - not a big film, but she always provides brilliance. So the winner of this? The non-nominee Ellen Page.

Best Breakout Star - I've seen two out of six. I can't really comment on this one.

Best Comedic Performance - Emma Stone in Easy A. I've only seen one out of five. She was alright, but I wouldn't say she's the best at making jokes work. Some females can carry a joke, some can't. Emma Stone has moments, but she isn't a natural. I'd opt for Zach Galifianakis - as in the moments of The Hangover that I enjoyed, he was there. That is all I can say.

Best Line from a Movie - "I want to get chocolate wasted". Just watched the scene on youtube. Delivered by a child...no thanks, I'm not a huge fan of Adam Sandler, his films, or quotes from his films. Easy A was nominated with "There is a higher power that will judge you for your indecency." "Tom Cruise?"' - this quote just annoyed me. The trailer ends with this quote, and I didn't find it that funny - it had potential to be funny, but Tom Cruise? Sank like a lead balloon on me. And the way she delivered it, just wasn't that great. Tom Hardy's quote from Inception was 'You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling." - Inception is brilliant, and this quote was brilliant, but there is a better quote on the nomination list. Delivered by Jesse Eisenberg in The Social Network, "If you guys were the inventors of Facebook, you'd have invented Facebook." Screenwriting at its BEST. Seriously. Brilliant. And Justin Timberlake's quote is alright, but not a brilliant quote from The Social Network - just another quote. Winner should have been Jesse Eisenberg's quote.

Best Villain? I've seen two of five. I can't make a judgment, but I can say that in the absence of any Twilight villains, Tom Felton jumped in as the token Harry Potter villain. And all the fans of Twilight/HP jump from one boat to the other, regardless of whether he was the best. I can't think of any other villains, apart from bad guy, Liev Schreiber in Salt. He was really good. But after looking through the nominees, I would be interested in seeing Christoph Waltz' performance in The Green Hornet as he was remarkable in Inglourious Basterds as the bad guy.

Best Fight? None of these fights sound that great. I've seen four of five fights, and none of them were very good. There must be other fights in films this year, what with The Prince of Persia, Clash of the Titans, the Karate Kid, Narnia...there will be a better fight in one of these films. Clearly MTV just stick to the usual films and won't stray. Stray! Be adventurous!

Best Kiss? R-Patz and Kristen Stewart win....surprise surprise. Their kiss could have been the most awkward thing ever, or just a kiss on the hand - and they'd still win. The Black Swan - no, just no. Eclipse - which kiss do you prefer? Oh, it it has to have Kristen Stewart in shot - yep, she was nominated again for her kiss with Jacob. I'm pretty sure kisses with your one love should be special and set above the rest, which just shows the character of Bella to be quite easy. There is no way she should have two nominations for best kiss, as it diminishes love forever. Harry Potter kissing Hermione aka Daniel Radcliffe (HAHAHAHAHAHA - good one MTV) kissing Emma Watson. Nope, not at all. And Inception - the context and what follows the kiss is better than the kiss itself as it's just a kiss, nothing that special about it - but the context of it is the winner. The kiss in Letters to Juliet should have been nominated.

Best jaw dropping moment? Justin Bieber in his performance spectacular. I am a JB fan, but his film bored me. I watched the first 45 mins, and got bored of him talking, girls screaming, his friend praising him, girls screaming, his manager praising him, girls screaming...eurgh. Boring. Maybe I didn't wait long enough for this spectacular performance - but I couldn't watch any more. The scene in The Black Swan didn't really cause my jaw to drop, more like my eyes to close and the mute put on - nasty, and unnecessary. In 127 hours, it is a great scene and James Franco does brilliantly, but I knew the general story, therefore it didn't cause my jaw to drop, but caused me to squint a bit think about what I would do in that situation. Jackass, I haven't seen. Inception had my jaw on the floor throughout...the CGI in the Paris cafe scene, in the famous scene where the town lifts up, and then at the end with the spinning top - does it stop? does it keep spinning? :O BRILLIANCE!

Biggest Badass Star? Now Gerard Butler won this award for his performance as King Leonidas in 300. He was a the epitome of the film bad ass. None of these nominees come close. If you can't find a bad ass with a badder ass than Gerard Butler's bad assness, then cancel the category. It's pointless.

Finally, the last award is The Best Scared-as-S**t performance. That's exactly the way it's written on imdb. Winner? Ellen Page in Inception. That's quite an interesting win. I thought Ellen Page was superb, but I didn't really think she was that scared - but held it together quite well. I haven't seen any of the others but Ryan Reynolds in Buried, being buried alive is not a nice thing - so I've heard. And 'Piranha's are things you don't really want to meet in water. The Last Exorcism sounds quite scary too....and the Roommate, scary stuff. I've had housemates and flatmates, but never a roommate - they could do all sorts of stuff to you like draw a moustache on your face as you sleep, or wake up with the dawn with a particularly loud alarm. AHHHH. Now THAT... is a scary thought.

Anyway, hope you've enjoyed reading my post on the latest MTV Movie Awards, and tune in next year for my analysis and opinions of the 2012 event.

My Extensive History with Instruments

I'm not sure about you, but I've had a long ordeal over the years in deciding which instrument to play. I had numerous factors to consider: whether my parents would approve; what I could get my hands on; what I could be bothered to practice; what would be easy to purchase; and what would be useful to play.

My various attempts to learn were fairly disastrous. Don't get me wrong, nothing went disastrously wrong...I just found a reason to stop learning. I reckon I could write a pretty good kids book going through each instrument as the reasons for stopping or not starting in the first place.

The first instrument I was made to play was the recorder. That lesson in which everyone had to bring their recorder in, and play nursery rhymes. I remember playing it - but can't remember anything about it now. I also loved playing the xylophone in infant school...but after I accidentally trod on one and sent all the metal bars on it flying, I was told off, made to sit in the corner, and not allowed to play it. Gutted.

The first instrument I wanted to play was the guitar, as my dad played, my brother played, my uncle played, and it seemed like everyone could play. How difficult could it be? As a fickle 7 year old, very. After a few weeks of attempting to play, and being put in a guitar orchestra (despite the fact I couldn't keep up with the others and eventually just acted like I could), I decided it wasn't for me. My fingers hurt, my hurt hurt, and I just couldn't be bothered...so I quit.

Then I wanted to play the trombone, but the music teacher said my arms were too short - so I wasn't allowed to. That was a gutting piece of information to receive. Therefore, she gave me a trumpet. May as well have slapped me in the face. I can safely say that didn't last long - I gave it a shot, but my parents didn't want me to have a trumpet as it would only sound good with other instruments. Good point. So I went for a euphonium - aka a small tuba. My parents also attempted to defer me away from this instrument for the same reason. They were obviously not too hot on me being in a brass band.

My parents, well my mum, was a big fan of Kenny G. A very good saxophonist. My mum wanted me to learn the saxophone. My best friend at the time played saxophone - but after seeing all those buttons and small metal lever things - I quickly opted out of it. Therefore, I resigned myself to settling with a kazoo. Simple to play, cheap to buy, and easy to hide/throw away. Perfect.

Ten(ish) years later of playing the kazoo at what would have been grade 7 standard, I was bored. So, I picked up my dad's guitar and sat by the computer - brought up ultimateguitar.com, and found a song. I had always wanted to play 'Cowboy Take Me Away' by the Dixie Chicks, they have an instrumental bit at the end of the song which I loved pretending to strum away to on my badminton racket. Therefore, this was the song I brought up with the chords. You can hover over the chord in question and it brings up this helpful little box which shows how to play the chord. After a week of practising, I played a little number to my dad. Suffice to say, his words were very encouraging, his eyes told a different story - but I appreciated the comment. So I continued. Then I went to uni and had to stop. Then I bought a second hand one from a friend of a friend, so I started again. Eventually, I was learning chords.

Somehow in between July 2008, and now... I would like to say I can play the guitar. Finally.

And as of Christmas 2010, I asked for a ukulele for Christmas - and I got one. Given it was a cheap, practice one...but with my instrument history, good call my parents...I could have given up. But for the past 6 months, I have been playing uke...and it's been going well. If you know how to play the guitar, learning the ukulele is quite simple, or it was for me anyway. The chord positions are different, but your fingers are used to having to move around on the fretboard, you just have to get used to the smaller neck to it. But once you get it, it's very worth it. As I said at the beginning, loads of people play the guitar...but not everyone plays a ukulele - it's a quirky little instrument and it reminds you of Hawaii if you let it...and you can play Jason Mraz songs.