TumblogWritings, musings and generally lighthearted banter

I’m getting all bitter and cynical in my quest to expose all the OVERRATED things in this world. If you have any ideas, please let me know… and on days when I think that all is fine and just with the world, I’ll include someone else’s choice for The Most Overrated Thing (or one of them at least). Just post your victims (sorry, suggestions) below.

Sure, I’m late with this post (I promise this won’t happen again!), but I’m still traveling. (I know, some people while they’re traveling can still send dozens of tweets per day, write three blogs a week, and do about 103 photos on Pinterest. But when I travel, I tend to… travel. And write. For magazines, mainly.

But while I’m in travel mode, I should add another OVERRATED thing about travel: namely, cheap flights. Some of them are OK, but if you see a “good deal”, assume that you won’t be getting much. Cheap flights usually mean that there’s a catch. Recently, I was in transit for a Frankfurt-Glasgow flight. This was a pain, because I’d booked my flight online to go through London, but the website kept certain information buried. There are five airports in London, and it’s a real nuisance if you arrive in Heathrow and have to find your way to Gatwick for the connection. Admittedly, I didn’t bother checking, because what sort of dumb website would give you a transfer at two separate airports? Yeesh!

It’s been over two months since my last post, as I’ve been flat out with other work. Great news for me, sure… but I should have kept updating. In the past month, many people have assumed that I’ve stopped doing this blog (a fair assumption) and have stopped following. I’ll try to do another blog each week (as well as my other weekly blog). OK, let’s start again…

OVERRATED: Flight upgrades

You can almost lie down in business class. Photo by livepine.

If you read the title (and it was fairly easy to notice), you probably already knew that I would be talking about this topic.

Though you might believe that I am flown around the world in business class (or premium economy, at least) by big business, I actually foot the bill for of most of my global jetsetting. That means that, like most people, I usually fly economy class. It must be one of the most commonly heard travel stories: the true misery of flying economy. Many people complain about this experience, which is possibly made worse by the fact that, on most planes, the regular economy travellers have to walk through the plush elite section of the plane, with the Ottoman footrests and the complimentary Dom Perrignon before they’ve even left the ground. Of course, this torture is very deliberate, to motivate you to pay for an upgrade on your next flight.

As someone who has flown in most classes (and for the record, usually finds economy class to be tolerable, though I’d hate to be there if I were six foot three), I feel that I should list a few reasons why business class (let’s not even discuss that ever-elusive first-class cabin) isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, if only so that the great majority who fly economy class can feel a bit better.

1. As Rose Byrne said in Bridesmaids (presumably because it was in the script, rather than because she believed it), there’s more sense of community in economy class. Strangely, it’s kind of true. I’ve met a Hollywood agent in first class, as well as an old lady who was in the chorus of movie musicals back in the fifties. But other than that (and neither of them helped me get a movie deal, so what was the point?), I can’t think of any other passengers I’ve met in first class or business class. We were too busy sleeping to actually chat with each other. I can remember numerous people I’ve met in economy class, however, with whom I chatted with gusto until we suddenly realized that we were missing the in-flight movie. When the seats are close together, rather than spaced out comfortably, life becomes more intimate.

2. In business class, there is only one toilet, two at the most. If there’s a queue, you have to wait not only for the previous person to finish, but for the stewardess (sorry, “cabin crew”) to finish cleaning it, which always seems to take a hell of a long time because they are doing such a thorough job. You’d think that business class people must be messier than everyone else.

3. It’s truly decadent in business class, which is bad, because you gain weight, and as you’re in a plane, you can’t go for a run to burn off the kilos.

4. You think economy class people can be annoying sometimes? The truly obnoxious people are closer to the pointy end of the plane. I’m sure that rock stars, for example, don’t travel in economy. At the height of their fame in the 1990s, Oasis was banned from one airline for making complete prats of themselves, which caused discomfort for fellow passengers. You can safely bet that they weren’t traveling in economy.

5. It’s difficult to go back. Once you’ve been in business or first class, you’ll suddenly think that economy class is a living hell. Flying suddenly becomes a terrible ordeal, in which you feel like a sardine and use words like “cattle class” (really overdoing the animal metaphors). And really, it’s not that bad.

Unless you’re six foot three, of course.

Meryl Streep after the 61st Academy Awards in 1989. She didn't win that year either. Photo by Alan Light.

As I write this, we are only days away from discovering the Oscar winners. Not that it matters, of course. Many times through the night, they will list five nominees with nothing in common, and then determine which of them is the “best”. This year, the most interesting category is for best actress, because the odds don’t really make sense. As usual, five performances have been nominated – all of which, in fairness, are excellent. But what do they have in common? Well, two of them are impersonations of famous people (three if you call Noomi Rapace “famous”). Other than that, nothing. So, as nobody could really be classed as the “best”, they have to come up with other reasons why someone should win over the other four. That’s why I would have thought that Meryl Streep was the favorite. While she’s called “the queen of the Oscars”, she’s lost more times than any other actor, only won twice (something even Hillary Swank has managed to do), and her last win was 29 years ago! (Then again, Katharine Hepburn had to wait 34 years between her first and second Oscars, so maybe Streep just needs to be patient.) But for some reason, according to the bookmakers, the odds are for Viola Davis to take out the award! Why? Not sure. Maybe because only one African-American has ever won in this category. Maybe because the lobbying has been stronger for The Help than for Streep’s film, The Iron Lady. Or maybe… maybe she’s just really good. Hopefully not, because that would put paid to my whole argument. Nuts…

I know it’s short notice (it was only confirmed yesterday… and I was out of town), but I’ll be on ABC News 24 at 8:45am this morning, on the Weekend Breakfast show, to talk about the Most Overrated Curses (as seen on The Huffington Post).

Photo by o5com (www.flickr.com/photos/o5com/5081595200/)

Walking is good for you. That’s true. Thomas Jefferson, the wisest President in America’s history, regarded it as the best form of exercise. But now, according to dietician Susie Burrell, we rely on it too much. “There’s a perception that going for a walk is getting good exercise,” she says, “but we’re now so sedentary, walking is just compensating for all the sitting we do in out daily lives.” Her solution? Working out more intensely. Sorry about that. Naturally, she explains it a little more…

But of course, not everyone can go running or do hour-long abs sessions, so here’s a link to encourage you to walk a few steps (which is better than sitting around).

Click here if you want an explanation of this photo.

This is something I noticed on the Sydney Morning Herald website about a trendy, “happening” restaurant that relies on pretentious patrons who don’t mind being treated badly, as it refuses people for various dumb reasons. Yes, a bit like an “exclusive” night club. While I haven’t been there, so I couldn’t vouch for the review, I’ve seen enough places that fit the description. Though I don’t usually bother reading comment on a Web story, I thought that this one summed up such places.

Arrogance like this works only in that narrow window when they are the “it” place. After that, when relationships and a loyalty built through good experiences really starts to count for everything, places like this will wither and die quickly. And no one will mourn their passing.

Fickle businesses bread fickle customers.

Oh yeah, here’s the link.

Teamwork by Gavin Llewellyn. The England cricket team celebrate a third successive victory against India at Edgbaston to secure their place as the world's number one Test team.

Well, it’s not all bad… but does everything have to be done in a team? “Most of us now work in teams, in offices without walls, for managers who prize people skills above all,” write sociologist Susan Cain in The New York Times. “Lone geniuses are out. Collaboration is in.”

But there’s a problem with this view. Research strongly suggests that people are more creative when they enjoy privacy and freedom from interruption. And the most spectacularly creative people in many fields are often introverted, according to studies by the psychologists Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and Gregory Feist. They’re extroverted enough to exchange and advance ideas, but see themselves as independent and individualistic. They’re not joiners by nature.

Solitude has long been associated with creativity and transcendence. “Without great solitude, no serious work is possible,” Picasso said.

Sure, obviously some things are best done as a team. Playing cricket, for example. And I thought that ending the Cold War required teamwork… but then I read that Ronald Reagan did it all by himself, so I must have been wrong!

Academy Award for Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs at the Walt Disney Family Museum. Photo by Loren Javier.

As Oscars season comes closer, and everyone spends their time guessing who will win, it’s worth reminding ourselves how utterly overrated the Academy Awards really are. True, they have helped a few careers, but have they made anyone a star recently? The closest one I can think of in living memory was Marion Cotillard, who probably would have been nabbed by Hollywood anyway because she was a) gorgeous, b) talented, c) gorgeous, d) already an established star in France, and e) gorgeous. Most other Oscar-winning actors I can recall were either stars already, or the Oscar didn’t really help (F Murray Abraham, Marlee Maitlin… No, I’ve never heard of them either). OK, the Oscar might have helped Adrian Brody, but he’s not as big as you’d expect. Look, instead of going through how pointless it all is, let me just list a few people who did not win Oscars…

1. Alfred Hitchcock (the Irving Thalberg Award was a nice gesture, but as it doesn’t look like an Oscar, it doesn’t count)

2. Alfred Hitchcock (this is just such an appalling snub that it deserves to be mentioned twice)

2b. Greta Garbo

3. Marilyn Monroe (OK, many – including me – would argue that she didn’t really deserve one… but she proves that you can be known as one of the greatest-ever film stars without even being nominated)

4. Cary Grant (see Marilyn Monroe… except he was at least nominated)

5. Martin Scorsese before 2000 (his Oscar for The Departed wasn’t “overdue”; it was completely the wrong film!)

6. Lillian Gish (who was still giving awesome performances in the early years of the Oscars)

7. Barbara Stanwyck

8. Richard Burton (a zillion nominations, no wins)

9. James Dean (those who accused Heath Ledger of only winning because he had died so young, please explain this)

10. Jacqueline McKenzie (well, not yet, at least – and dammit, that’s a tragedy!)

Sadly, Michael Clarke has given up on the long-standing record for most ridiculous cricketer's mustache. (Photo courtesy of the New York Public Library.)

Yes, I include this one in the book – basically saying that all the hype when someone breaks a sports record (with the help of the latest technology) is a little OTT, because it happens all the time. (It would be more of a big story if a sports record stood for years without being broken.)

Of course, there are some exceptions. Australian cricketer Michael Clarke has just broke the latest one: the highest batting score at the Sydney Cricket Ground. The previous record: Englishman Reg ‘Tip’ Foster’s 287 against the Australians in 1903. 1903!!! I won’t try to explain to those across the ocean who don’t understand cricket (mainly because I don’t understand it myself), but for those who don’t understand basic math, Clarke has just broken a 109-year-old record!

For the record, the Sydney Cricket Ground is important enough for the record to be significant. (Think of a Wimbledon record being broken in tennis.) Unlike most sports records, this one is very exciting. (Well, “exciting” in cricket terms, at least.)

IF - Juggle, by gr33ndata

Multitasking – being able to juggle dozens of things at once – has always been admired (even before the word was coined). It’s now something we’re all expected to do in the modern world (just like our iPhones), and another thing that women can boast about to show their superiority to men. (“I can update my Facebook page, change the baby’s diapers and cook dinner at the same time! Men can’t do that.”) But as the smart people at Luminosity note, research suggests that multi-tasking is highly OVERRATED.

When people attempt to attend to several different tasks, they’re not actually working on all of them at once. “Multitasking,” as it’s used in common parlance, is somewhat of a misnomer: rather than performing multiple tasks simultaneously, the brain actually switches rapidly between tasks. And task-switching is an expensive habit for the untrained brain—the cognitive control required to flip back and forth gobbles up the brain’s limited processing power. The result: plenty of extra time and effort expended, usually rendering any attempt to “multitask” less efficient than simply concentrating on one task at a time.

What does this mean for those of us who are constantly plugged in, forever fiddling with a dozen things to see and do? The popularity of multitasking in modern culture has left its true detriments largely ignored. But it’s time to put down your phone—and your tablet, and your iPod, and your remote.

There is plenty of scientific evidence against multitasking. You can check it out here.