You probably know Have I Got News For You, the satirical news quiz that pits Ian Hislop, Paul Merton and celebrity guests against each other in a light-hearted battle of wit and irony. The following purports to be a transcript of the sections removed from an episode, when the guests included Jimmy Saville, and things got more than usually out of hand. It is entirely possible that it is a complete fabrication, and I make absolutely no claims as to the validity of the following – but even if it’s a complete fabrication, it is extremely funny.

Or rather, it was. Demon refused to let me publish the full version – what follows is edited, and approved by them. If you want to see the reasons why this is the only version I’m allowed to publish, here are the details.

---

Series 17, Show 7

Recorded 27/5/99 for transmission on 28/5/99
Guests: Sir James Saville OBE, Diane Abbott MP
Prog No: 06/HGT/SW76Q
Running time: 102'46'03 (Edited to 28'54)
Producer: Giles Pilbrow
Hat Trick 1999

Here are some extracts from an unedited Have I Got News For You rushes
tape. (The cut dialogue is isolated by square brackets and printed in
bold.)

Out-take 1: 02’45
Following a discussion about the England rugby boss taking cocaine:

MERTON
It wouldn’t be so bad if News Of The World, News International, if they actually paid any tax in this country – they haven’t paid any tax since about 1983. So that would be alright, you could say ‘Well, y’know, OK, they can have a go at the royals, they can have a go at anybody’. But they, y’know, they owe us billions of pounds in tax. You could have built hospitals with that. Or given it to me. (Audience applauds)

DEAYTON
I assume the applause was for the hospitals, not giving it to Paul. (Audience laughs)

[MERTON
There you go – that’s me reading Ian’s bits on the autocue. That’s post-modern for you. Hospitals? Yeah, like I give a fuck. (Huge audience laugh)

SAVILLE
The ______ of the ________ – what’s his name?

HISLOP
________.

SAVILLE
That’s right. Very nice man.

HISLOP
Mmm. ________________________________ (____ ______ _______ _____; Audience giggles)

DEAYTON
I feel the word ‘allegedly’ homing into view…

HISLOP
Yes. And I feel the phrase ‘________ __ _ ___ ___ ______’ homing into view. (Pause) Sorry, I’m just looking at our lawyer in the front row. (Waves at lawyer) Hello! (Audience laughs)

DEAYTON
Have you ever taken drugs, Jimmy?

SAVILLE
Well…

HISLOP
You can tell us. ________ and you are like that.]

SAVILLE
I have a drugs record. (Uncertain pause)

HISLOP
Do you?

SAVILLE
Mm.

HISLOP
And do you play it a lot? (Audience laugh)

SAVILLE
212 marathons and I’ve never been tested once.

[HISLOP
Good god. You and ________ both.

SAVILLE
Ah, but he never ran the marathon…

HISLOP
Oh right…

MERTON
Yes he did. He used to go dressed as a ___ ___ ______. (Audience laughs)

HISLOP
Oh yes, I remember now…

MERTON
It made a change from a giant chicken, so he said. The judge gave him five years (Pause) I don’t know what I’m talking about. I’ve done 212 of these shows and I’ve never been tested once.

HISLOP
(To Saville) So they’ve never tested you?

SAVILLE
Yeah. ] And I say, what’s wrong with me, why can’t you test me? And he said ‘Because you come in last, so…’. (Audience laugh)

---

Out-take 2: 04’17
Following a discussion about Sun editor David Yelland’s decision to publish topless pictures of Sophie Rhys Jones:

 

SAVILLE
It’s well out of order.

HISLOP
Indeed. And it’s Mr Murdoch again.

SAVILLE
Yes. How would he like to see his, er, er, secret lover naked in someone else’s paper?

HISLOP
If anyone’s got any pictures, do drop them…in…

[MERTON
____ ___ ____.

DEAYTON
Well, you’ll have to share them with us next time, Paul…

MERTON
I will. It could be an entirely new game. ________________________

DEAYTON
Are you _______ __ _________ _______ _______ into question?

MERTON
Not at all. __________________

DEAYTON
We look forward to it.

MERTON
I don’t. ________________ (Smattering of audience applause)

DEAYTON
But The Sun have apologised, of course…]

---

Out-take 3: 09’36
During the headline round:

 

DEAYTON
You used to be a wrestler didn’t you?

SAVILLE
I still am.

DEAYTON
Are you?

SAVILLE
___ ______ __ _____ ______ ______ __ ___ _______. (Audience laugh)

DEAYTON
Yeah, I’ve heard about that.

SAVILLE
What have you heard?

DEAYTON
I’ve…

MERTON
____________________________ (Huge audience laugh; Awkward pause)

SAVILLE
____________________________

MERTON
____________________________ (Audience laughs)

HISLOP
Weren’t you leaving money in phone boxes or something? (Saville glares at him) Or have I got completely the wrong end of the…

SAVILLE
(To Deayton, heavily) The question you asked was about wrestling.

DEAYTON
Yes. And then you mentioned ______ _______. I don’t know whe…

SAVILLE
Well I understood this was a comedy programme. I realise now how wrong I was. (Audience laugh)

DEAYTON
So were you a professional wrestler?

SAVILLE
Yes I was.

DEAYTON
(To audience) Glad we got that cleared up. (Pulls face; audience giggles)

HISLOP
______ __ _____ ______ _____ __ ___ _______…

SAVILLE
That’s right.

MERTON
_________________________ (Huge audience laugh)

DEAYTON
Erm…

HISLOP
You’re on top form tonight, Paul…

SAVILLE
(Strangely) I’m…this is not what I…

FLOOR MANAGER (OOV)
OK, do you…[inaudible section]…shall we, for pick-ups…

MERTON
I’m terribly sorry. I don’t know what came over me.

SAVILLE
_______________________ (Shocked audience laugh)

MERTON
Oh, it’s nice to see you joining in. We’d been waiting for you, _____________. (Audience appears to do double-take)

DEAYTON
I think we…d-d-you you want to apologise to our guest, Paul?

MERTON
Sorry, I do apologise. ________________________________ (Audience unrest)

HISLOP
Sorry, I’m just looking at our lawyer again. (Waves) Hello! (Audience laughs)

DEAYTON
Shall we get back on course with this, or sha…

SAVILLE
_______________________________________

MERTON
_______________________________________ (Audience laughs)

FLOOR MANAGER (OOV):
Come on…I’m getting an ear-bashing here. It’s…

MERTON
Oh they want to continue. Sorry, I’ll contain myself. Carry on…

DEAYTON
Right (Pause) You used to be a professional wrestler didn’t you? (Huge audience laugh)

SAVILLE
(Calmly) I did.]

DEAYTON
You didn’t have a nickname or anything?

SAVILLE
Yes – ‘Loser’. (Audience laughs)

---

Out-take 4: 21’20Following a discussion about caravans:

 

DEAYTON
Last month, Roger Moore sold his luxury caravan in Malta. [Asked by the…

MERTON
I visited your caravan the other week, Jimmy.

SAVILLE
Did you really?

MERTON
Oh yes. ______________________________ (Audience laugh)

HISLOP
He just told you, it was twelve years ago…

SAVILLE
No, I lived in it for twelve years.

MERTON
_____________________________ (Audience laugh)

DEAYTON
Here we go again…I’ll be backstage if anyone wants me.

MERTON
_____________________________ (Audience laugh)

SAVILLE
_____________________________

HISLOP
Not even Sarah Cornley?

SAVILLE
She was an exception.

DEAYTON
Who’s Sarah Cornley?

SAVILLE
Sarah Cornley is…

HISLOP
About fifteen grand in damages, wasn’t she? (Uncertain audience laugh)

SAVILLE
That’s right.

HISLOP
_____________________________

SAVILLE
You’d be very wrong. (Pause) _______________________ (Audience unease)

MERTON
_____________________________

SAVILLE
Chrome-plated SC-700 sun-visors, these are. Sent to me by…

MERTON
_____________________________

HISLOP
(To lawyer again) Hello! (Audience laughs)

MERTON
_____________________________

DEAYTON
(Visibly out of character) Do you wanna stop, or…?

MERTON
_____________________________

SAVILLE
_____________________________

MERTON
_____________________________

FLOOR MANAGER
(OOV) …About five minutes, just to… (Phil Davey enters)

PHIL DAVEY
OK, well top that as they say. You’re looking troubled by that, aren’t you mate? I tell you, I came back from Amsterdam recently…

[RECORDING PLACED ON STAND-BY; CUTS BACK TO CLOSE-UP OF DEAYTON AWAITING HIS CUE]

DEAYTON
OK. Second time lucky. (Pause) Last month, Roger Moore sold his luxury caravan in Malta.] Asked by the New York Times about his relaxed acting style…

If anyone had said to me five years ago that I would be packing beads most evenings for a living, I would have laughed, looked at them very strangely and politely suggested an increase in medication. But this is now the very situation in which I find myself, and not only that, I am probably working harder than at any time since I graduated university.

On Monday morning, I started work just after 8am, with the acknowledgements of the Ebay auctions which had finished overnight. With only a break for dinner, I finished my day’s work at some time after midnight, when the last parcel of the day was sealed, addressed and ready to go into the post. Yet, despite the outward appearance of slave labour, why do I remain intensely happy, and why does the prospect of ever going back to HSBC fill me with terror?

The major difference is certainly in working for yourself, which means that you get to see the benefits of your efforts. Back in HSBC, if you got a job finished quickly and efficiently…you just got given something else to do, which is scarcely an incentive. You got paid, not for the effort, but for merely turning up, and so the general rule of thumb was to do the absolute minimum possible to get through the day. And that wasn’t very much – doing nothing didn’t seem to be grounds for getting fired, you had to be actively and dangerously incompentent for that.

Now, my situation is different. If I don’t do the Ebay ads, no-one else will. Well, Chris would, but as she is currently got her own nightmarish battle against the force of darkness (a.k.a. a day job) to deal with, it seems only fair that I take on my share of responsibilities. Conversely, no-one else can take credit for what we do, such as our having more than tripled hits to the site in the past five months; a combination of Chris’s good customer service and my judicious (and, so far, entirely cost-free!) advertising. We do stuff, we get the benefit – classic carrot/stick behaviour, basic capitalism at work, unimpeded by steering committees made up of middle management.

It is indescribably pleasant being your own boss. No more need to cower in fear, minimising your windows because you are sitting outside the God-Emperor’s office. No more need to censor bad words from your email. And I can go to the fridge and have a beer whenever I want one. Not that I do…during office hours anyway. 🙂 Plus I get to hug my co-employee, though admittedly, this is something which I never really wanted to do back at HSBC anyway.

Seeing trashcity.com grow has been a source of immense pride and joy, to the extent where I now pour over graphs of visitors there far more than the orphan child which is this web site. I admit that keeping here going has taken a bit of a back seat recently, due to a sheer lack of time (both movies reviewed this week ended up being watched in multiple installments, fitted round the more financially-essential work), but it is to be hoped, if sales continue to go well, that Chris will be assisting me during the day, and we’ll reclaim our evenings.

Till then, an hour or two of gentle bead-packing is hardly a chore, since it also works as quality time with my one true love. My fear – and this is one that has me waking up screaming in the middle of the night – is that it can’t last, that the bottom is about to fall out of the bottom of the bead market, and that I’ll have to find myself a McJob to make ends meet. After less than six months away from the world of bosses, Internet nannies and inter-deparmental memoranda, it’s a prospect that I find myself more than slightly unwilling to face!

Devil: My job is to ensure standards of television programmes continue to spiral downwards. Chat-shows, game-shows, soap-operas — anything I can do to guarantee their continual awfulness.
[SIGNS PAPER]
Condemned Soul: What was that?
Devil: Just commissioned another 25 years of Jim’ll Fix It.
Condemned Soul: Oh, good. I like Jimmy Saville – he’s very good with children.

TV Hell introduction, 31st August 1992

The significance of the above will become clear in due course. But first, let me take you on a journey, which began one Friday evening when the very site you are reading, ceased to exist. Permission denied, it said. This being my own site, it seemed a little strange, to say the least. But logging in, I found the following email had been sent to postmaster:

From: _____@demon.net
Cc: legalnotice@demon.net
Subject: www.trshcity.demon.co.uk…
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000

Please note: The contents of this email may be legally privileged. They should not be copied or disseminated within or outside Thus Plc without prior authorisation from Legal Services. The recipient of this email may reply to Legal Services but should not cc other addressees.
___________________________________________________
Dear sir,

We have received an allegation that you have material on your website
http://www.trshcity.demon.co.uk/ARTICLES/NEWSFORU.HTM
which our external solicitors believe to bear defamatory meaning and as such we have had to suspend access to your webpages.

The part in question is the transcript.

We cannot and do not make any judgement as to whether such material is defensible. However, the state of the law at the moment means that if we are put on notice that defamatory material is being published through our systems, Thus plc may be liable for damages, along with you, if it does not take action to prevent that material being published. Those damages could be substantial and we could both incur heavy legal expenses.

In addition, the current state of the law could leave Thus plc liable if it failed to take action and you disseminated any further material through our systems which was later found to be defamatory. While we do not necessarily agree with the current legal position we must accept it, and have therefore suspended access to your website.

Please reply to this email acknowledging that you understand the problem, that you have removed the material from your website and that you will not, in future, publish further material which could be considered defamatory of various (named) celebrities through Demon’s systems.

We attach below a suggested form of acknowledgement for your convenience.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT

I acknowledge receipt of your email and confirm that I understand your explanation of the legal situation regarding material which is considered defamatory.

I confirm that I have removed the material from my website. I will not publish such material in future using my Demon service, and will not publish further material which could be considered defamatory of the celebrities which have been named on the site.

I look forward to hearing from you.
_______________
Paralegal
Thus Plc

The piece in question was a transcript of alleged outtakes from an edition of Have I Got News For You featuring Paul Merton and Jimmy Saville. This had been sent to me by a friend, and I’d posted it on the site, simply because I’d thought it was funny. I even added a disclaimer saying that I had no idea whether it was accurate, but this was no defence in the eyes of Demon.

To get my web-site restored, I removed the piece, and sent the form they requested back, and in due course, www.trshcity.demon.co.uk returned to service. However, I remained a more than a little peeved that Demon would pull the site and, in effect, pronounce me guilty, not only until proven innocent, but without even giving me any chance to prove my innocence. I wrote, pointing this out. Their reply follows.

Currently the situation regarding defamation in the UK is such that ISPs are liable for content held on its servers as soon as it is put on notice of such content and failure to remove that material could end up with us being sued as well as you.

As an ISP, the Defamation Act requires us to act responsibly by (a) removing the material from our servers and (b) making sure that similar material cannot not be published in the future. This requires us, in your case (having received a complaint), to notify you of this situation and seek some kind of acknowledgement regarding future
material, and also to remove the material from our servers, which is achieved by temporarily suspending your web site.

We do not take these decisions lightly and refer all cases to external solicitors (at cost to us) for a decision about whether the material bears a defamatory meaning.

We do not wish to make any judgement as to whether the material in question is indeed defamatory. We are in no position to make this decision ourselves, this is up to a Court to decide.

You may have heard of the Godfrey -v- Demon Internet case where Demon Internet were taken court over defamatory material held on its servers.

We would also like to have more information as to the precise nature of the alleged defamation. It is clearly wrong to claim that every single word in the transcript is defamatory, and without full details of the accusations being made against us, we are unable to accept that they are justified. We thus request details of the specific complaints received by you.

Our solicitors felt that most of the web page could be considered to bear defamatory meaning. Specifically, they felt that it was defamatory of Phil Hall, David Yelland, Jimmy Saville, Paul Merton and possibly Angus Deayton and Ian Hislop too.

With regard to the article, we would still like to publish it, and want to work with you in order to achieve this. We therefore offer the following possibilities for discussion, with the aim of hopefully reaching agreement on the matter.

1) The article already contains a disclaimer which states that we “make absolutely no claims as to the validity of the following”. This could be made more prominent and/or reworded.

I do not believe that this would make any difference if the material was found by a court to be defamatory. You should seek further legal advice regarding this.

2) If we are given details of the parts found offensive, they could be > removed from the piece.

We would suggest that you seek legal advice based on my comments above.

3) We can move the transcript from Demon to another server, and make the link on our site point to it there.

Unfortunately, this could also be considered defamatory as it still causes in effect, the publication of the defamatory material through your Demon service, even if it is hosted elsewhere.

But when looked into further, this seemed very debatable to me. The interconnectedness of the Net means that, if linking to a defamatory site is itself just as defamatory, then any one defamation renders virtually the entire Internet guilty! This is clearly nonsense, and indeed, Section 1(3) of the 1996 Defamation Act states that, “a person shall not be considered the author, editor or publisher of a statement if he is only involved…(e) as the operator of or provider of access to a communications system by means of which the statement is transmitted, or made available, by a person over whom he has no effective control.“

As a result, in the case of Godfrey vs. Demon to which they referred, Justice Morland said “In my judgment the defendants were clearly not the publisher of the posting and incontrovertibly can avail themselves of Section 1(1)(a)”, relieving Demon of liability. As far as I could see, what caused Justice Morland to find against Demon, was their failure to take action after being notified of the alleged defamation. If the material in question hadn’t been held on their servers at all, it was hard to see how Demon could have been found liable for it.

So, while I could conceivably be sued, Demon would be perfectly safe. However, the chances of any suit were, I reckon, very slim: I doubt the people who read the piece here numbered more than a few hundred at most, as opposed to the millions who would find out about it during a court case. Far better just to send out some threatening letters, try and suppress it all quietly, and hope it goes away. In this light, it’s also interesting to note Demon’s unwillingness to tell me who had complained – I have a pretty good idea though, and I doubt very much it was Angus Deayton.

In this case, however, it backfired – their actions fired up my interest in a piece I’d otherwise have quickly forgotten about, and I started looking on the Net. First thing I found was, that if someone had been trying to suppress it, they’d been doing a pretty poor job. My very first search engine query, the very first page, and I was there, staring at the whole thing. Not just once, but five separate copies of it. They used to say that the Internet treats censorship as damage, and routes around it – I was beginning to understand the truth of that statement.

Picking around the sides of these, I did find a couple of interesting sites. One site said responsibility had been claimed by Some of the Corpses are Amusing, but I could find no actual evidence thereof. There was one piece in the Guardian about the transcript, citing un-named “sources” as saying it was a hoax – un-named equals no reliance in my book (the Guardian also had a very interesting interview with Saville). But there was absolutely no trace of, for example, Paul Merton saying, “it’s a hoax”, which would have nailed things shut, once and for all.

All the while, I continued, sporadically, to debate the possibilities with Demon, and work towards an edited version of the transcript. I can feel some sympathy for them, and I have to say they were friendly and polite, explaining the reasons for their qualms. But they were obviously erring strongly on the side of caution and even wanted material removed that was part of the broadcast! We finally came to an agreement, and the edited version may be found here. It’s not very funny though…

It’s hard to come to a compromise when they keep saying “Nyet”: if I’m not allowed to link to it, can I perhaps give people instructions on how they can find it? No, because of Hird v Wood in 1894 – the relevance of that in the Internet era is somewhat arguable. There was something deeply ironic about Demon defending the honour of TV presenters against totally unwarranted accusations of paedophilia, while their servers carried the likes of alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children.

Almost as interesting as the veracity or otherwise of the transcript, is looking into who would be behind a hoax, if such it actually is. A leading suspect must be Chris Morris, of Brass Eye fame – he announced Saville’s death on his radio show once, and got into a bit of bother for it. I’ve no idea whether the resulting law-suit was ever settled, but it does at least give Morris a motive, and his surreally excessive style of comedy would fit the transcript.

But there are perhaps two other candidates: the people in the sketch at the top of this piece, which I stumbled across in my tape collection only a few months ago. Who were these reprobates, expressing such a clear dislike for Jimmy Saville, seven years before all this allegedly happened? None other than Angus Deayton and Paul Merton…

[Here is the Demon approved, expurgated version]

One of the major sources of customers for TC is Ebay. Every week, we put 3-400 auctions up there, which not only bring in a good amount of cash, they also introduce a lot of potential clients to the awesome stock of beading supplies which is www.trashcity.com. This is because each of our auctions have a link to our website, allowing the users to see other items in which they might be interested, and assure themselves that we are not some dodgy fly-by-night operation. [Or at the very least, some dodgy fly-by-night operation with a spiffy web site] This seems natural and fair, and aids both us and our customers.

Ebay have, however, wised up, realising that anyone leaving their site might lead to them not getting their thirty pieces of silver, since they could – gasp! – buy things elsewhere! Naturally, this can’t be permitted. So, as of the end of the month, they will no longer allow us to link from items to external sites, although linking to Ebay subsidiaries such as half.com is still permitted! And – what a surprise – Ebay will shortly be offering their own storefronts to users; at a price, of course. Who will buy my lovely fresh air?!

Needless to say, this will make for a lot of work, since all of our auctions have to be altered, one at a time, to remove the offending link. Or at least, revise it, since Ebay – in what seems like a sop to defuse the loud protests from their users – will still continue sellers to link to their sites from the “About Me” page which each user has. Needless to say, this loophole allows a column of tanks to tap-dance their way through, and so our About Me page is virtually a clone of our home page at trashcity.com.

It remains to be seen how long Ebay will permit anything that hints at the possible existence of other places to buy and sell goods. They already seem to be realising the possibilities, and are imposing restrictions on the ‘About Me’ page. These are, however, making things even more complex, witness this quote on a discussion board from one Ebay staff member:

“For instance, you can say “click here to visit my website” from the About Me (not the Listing Page), but you can’t say “To view my other jewelry, please click here to visit my website.”“

The reasoning by which one is entirely permitted, yet the other is completely unacceptable, is unclear to me, but would appear to be as tortuous as a pretzel specially baked for a convention of contortionists.

Ebay make the legal claim to be no more than an intermediary, in much the same way as a newspaper takes no responsibility for trades done through its classified ads. I suspect this position cannot remain tenable, in the face of a continuing welter of restrictions and regulations: you can’t advertise this way, you can’t sell this product at all. A perfect example of the latter is their all-but-complete ban on a number of things which came into effect yesterday, including serial-killer items and Third Reich memorabilia. I couldn’t give a damn about sad Manson- or Gein-worshipping geeks, or a bunch of historo-retards who’ve not realised who won World War II – but it’s still pretty blatant censorship.

This change was, as you’ve probably guessed, in response to whinges from the usual sources (to whom I’m not going to give any more publicity), and to protect their precious markets in France, Germany, Austria, etc. where the sale of such things are forbidden. I note, with a deep sense of irony, that France and Austria currently have the two of the most popular extreme-right wing parties in Europe (Jorg Haider of the Freedom Party almost became Austria’s chancellor!), while Germany has perhaps the worst racial violence of any country in Western Europe.

It’s clear that attempts to doublethink the past into oblivion doesn’t work, and it’s equally obvious that Ebay’s caving-in to a vocal minority will have no positive effect. It’s nothing more than a purely mercenary decision made under the guise of morality, and deserves to be condemned as such.

Believe you’ve got an election coming up over there in Britain. Or at least, so I’ve heard, courtesy of the BBC web-site; that little item of news has not, so far, been deemed deserving of any coverage at all in any of the regular American media. Can’t say I’m sorry: Blair or Hague – what a delightful choice! Er, Hague is still leader of the Tories, isn’t he? Admittedly, was never sure on that point, even when I was living in Tulse Hill. At least British elections only last a month – here, the campaigning goes on for a year or more, and the post-vote lawsuits take almost as long. You’ve hardly brought in one president, before he heads out on the baby-kissing trail once again.

Another difference is well illustrated by the fact I was collapsing in a laughter at a phone-in radio show, where the presenter was outraged that the cost of gasoline (a.k.a. petrol) might go as high as $2/gallon! The horror! The horror! Even allowing for the fact that American gallons are smaller than British ones – because their pints are, at a mere 16 fl.oz. – this would certainly see riots in the UK, but only because, at that price, everyone would be rushing to fill up their tanks, baths, and every other container capable of holding fuel. There was even talk of a one-day fuel boycott, which I’m sure would work every bit as well as it did in Britain e.g. not at all, because even those people who took part just filled up in advance.

I don’t think refinery blockades would work either, simply because many Americans regard the ability to drive as a god-given right, and it is a necessity in Arizona due to the “somewhat limited” – I’m being very kind – public transport. Still, in a land where gas-guzzling cars are a staple [that advert in Robocop wasn’t much of an exaggeration], it was amusing to hear people saying things barely short of “they can take my Sports Utility Vehicle when they pry my cold, dead hands off the steering-wheel”. Think there must be some part of the American Constitution which enshrines the right to bear four-wheel drives and, clearly, no-one here remembers 1973.

On the other hand, there is at least a great deal of four-wheel drive suitable territory here, and unlike London, plenty of room to park anything bigger than a gnat’s arse. Even I have got used to driving a car you climb up into, to the extent that a “normal” (by British standards) car feels more like a go-cart. You also have to factor into gas mileage, the essential need for air-conditioning – 104 degrees is the forecast for today – which gobbles up so much fuel that certain steep slopes have a warning on them to turn off the A/C before beginning the ascent. Frankly, I’d rather run out of petrol and career hopelessly back down, than lose the cooling.

I can laugh, in part because I’m lucky to have a job that requires a daily commute of approximately 30 feet, from the bedroom to the office. And I’m pleased to report that Trash City – or the financially sound bit which sells beads, anyway – just had a banner week, with five grand in sales for the first time. We’re getting close to the point where Chris can quit her day job and work full-time on our plot to conquer the world through jewellery components. This is much-anticipated – not least by Chris herself, for obvious reasons, even if it’s a prospect I find more than a little scary. I am of a pessimistic persuasion, and so am certain that if we do go full-time, the bubble will immediately burst, and I’ll have to go work in McDonald’s. D’you want beads with that?

---