Blunt Sword

Russia - Saudi Arabia 5-0 (Gazynski '12, Cheryshev '43 '90, Dzyuba '71, Golovin '90)

I was thinking that yesterday I said we should fight all the wars on a football pitch, while at the same time moaning today's game will be won in an office. And while I'm sure precautions have been taken, if this is all Saudi Arabia can bring to the table then Russia would've won anyway. The emphatic matter in which they did doesn't really count for anything, as the opposition has been incredibly poor and it was far from a dominant performance of the Russians. On the contrary, the Saudi had more possession and better passing accuracy, which goes to show the uselessness of Guardiola's football 'philosophy': possession and passing are useless without attempts, and the Saudis had none on target.

The game started animated enough, with both teams giving it a go in the beginning and with apparently an extra dose of aggressiveness from the Saudis, though their stamina levels dropped fast to the point where they weren't really in the game by the end of it, as shown by the two injury time goals.

But the Russians did get a goal pretty quickly and the crowds on Luzhniki forgot for a second they live under an oppressive dictatorship. One more before half time so the beers go down better, but only the fourth goal, Cheryshev's second, had any real skill contribute to it. Good chip with the outside of the right foot over the Saudi defenders whose main job in this game has been to make up the numbers.

So yeah, it was a bad idea to have the host nation, rather than the defending champions, opening the World Cup. This has provided the very memorable (not!) South Africa - Mexico and Russia - Saudi Arabia so far as games that have to live up to the hype of 4 years' expectations and a huge build-up, and we haven't gotten to the Qatar World Cup yet.

The Russians are now as good as qualified and they'll probably win the group. Egypt-Uruguay tomorrow should be quite revealing in terms of the shape of this group, and by the end of tomorrow we'll probably know who's going to win Group B, too. Oh, yeah, and there's also Morocco - Iran. Eid Mubarak!

Man of the match?

So the World Cup

This is it. 24 hours from now we'd have seen the first game of this World Cup. I expect it to be very poor quality football, as I expect it to be rigged. Hosts Russia have already been assigned to the first seeding pot and have landed in a relatively easy group, so I expect a replay of South Korea's World Cup run in 2002 on a bigger scale. Too mean? FIFA is corrupt, Russia is corrupt and they both have a reputation of cheaters. I'll find it very hard to forgive Russia after the 6-1 against Cameroon in Italy in 1990, a game that was rigged so blatantly obvious, yet a game that has put the otherwise completely unremarkable Oleg Salenko in the history books for scoring the most goals in a World Cup game.

That's right, one of my first world cup memories is Russia cheating, and you're damn right I'll hold a 30 years grudge for that. My very first world cup memory dates from 10 days earlier, the opening game in which the unknown Untamed Lions of Cameroon defeated the defending champions Argentina which included arguably the biggest footballer ever to have walked the earth: Diego Maradona. And I've been writing about the World Cups ever since. On dedicated notebooks for Italy 1990 and USA 1994, in a folder that I doubt still exists about France 1998, on BB forums about Korea & Japan 2002 and Germany 2006 and on this very blog for the last two editions. The novelty this time is that I'll be writing in English, as I have with most of my online presence for the past 5 years or so. Simple reasons: wider reach, and the vast majority of my Romanian speaking audience is literate in English, whereas the opposite is not true about my English-speaking audience/friends/entourage.

It's probably clear by now that the magic of the World Cup is still alive and well inasmuch as I'm concerned. I'm hoping the magic will hold after this edition too and we will be gifted memorable moments despite the build up being under rather poor auspices. And in this series of posts I'll try to capture these moments of magic the way I'll see them and live them. If you're gonna keep reading, expect a lot of subjectivity and supporter bias.

As of yet, I don't have a clear favorite.

• Brazil are sort of perennial favorites for me and for the world, though I have to say I do not like Neymar. I do not like his football, I am not impressed with his skill, I hate the hype around him and I despise the money used to move him around. 
• Germany seem to be one of the cleanest candidates and, although I never felt any sort of special connection with Nationalmannschaft, I'd be happy for Low to become the first manager to win two World Cups after Vittorio Pozzo in 1938.
• I do not support Spain, France, England or, until Messi retires, Argentina and find it disappointing that Italy, Netherlands and USA are not present.

I suppose once I see the first round of games I'll start leaning towards one or a couple of teams. Speaking of, let me take a look at the groups and try some predictions:

Group A: Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Uruguay

I'd love for Russia not to qualify, but I don't expect it. I hope at least they won't win the group. Regardless, I expect them to go through, one way or another. Which means Uruguay will probably get the second qualifying spot. Egypt might have the one season wonder Salah, but he's the one flower that don't make a spring and Misr Pharaos are traditionally bad at world cups. Saudi Arabia has a great history, with the likes of Al-Owairan or Al-Jaber making history in their own right, but the Saudi Falcons might have to sit this one out.

Group B: Portugal, Spain, Morocco, Iran

Both Morocco and Iran had their 15 minutes of fame at world cups, but this group seems relatively straightforward. Only question mark hangs around Spain and their silly decision to sack the manager 48 hours before the start of the World Cup. Add this to the abysmal performance they had in Brazil 4 years ago, and the Islamic nations might be vying for blood (no, it's not Islamophobic, I'd love them to). I'd love to see it happening, and I'd love Iran to go through. It always has political consequences when they do well on the pitch.

Group C: France, Australia, Peru, Denmark

Much as I'd love the Socceroos, they'll probably go home after three games. Peru will very likely accompany them to the airport, as Denmark seem to have a good generation this time around. Yeah, France will go through, probably qualifying after a bad refereeing decision.

Group D: Argentina, Iceland, Croatia, Nigeria

Oh, wow. Assuming Argentina gets a spot, the second will be fiercely contested. Iceland did great two years ago at the Euros, but I'm not sure that says anything about their ability to compete this month. I want Nigeria to go through; sub-Saharan Africa is rather under-represented this year, with just Nigeria and Senegal flying the flag. Ideally it would be Nigeria and Iceland, though it might be a hard ask. And normally I'd be more sympathetic towards Croatia, but their national team seem to be less and less remarkable each year, despite Modric. Besides, the Davor Suker penalty in 1998 in France is hard to forget.

Group E: Brazil, Switzerland, Costa Rica, Serbia

I hope Costa Rica will provide great moments to rival the ones of their magnificent Luis Gabelo Conejo in 1990, or Paul Wanchope taking on Germany single-handedly in the opening game of WC2006, but I doubt they have the strength to qualify. I think and I hope Serbia will go through alongside Brazil. Switzerland have a good enough team, but Serbia is better prepared to deal with the Latin American flair.

Group F: Germany, Mexico, Sweden, South Korea

Looks like the most straight-forward: Germany and Mexico. Sweden have been gifted with a second sentence every time their name is uttered (Can you imagine this? Sweden!) and a poor-ass Italian team in the play-offs, but this is real life and Zlatan is gone. South Korea? Nice try.

Group G: Belgium, Panama, Tunisia, England

People are speaking about Belgium as being in with a chance to win it, but those of us who've seen all this before know better: they will fizzle out in front of real opposition. Which they won't get from this group though, so they'll advance alongside England, traditional QF losers.

Group H: Poland, Senegal, Colombia, Japan

Uhh, this is hard. I have sympathy for each and every team here, but for different reasons. I like the fact that Poland has a generation good enough to matter and they're the best Eastern European team at the moment. I still keep fond memories of Bruno Metsu's Senegal at WC2002, as I do of the relentless Shoji Jo, never stopping from his runs on the pitches of France in 1998. As for Colombia, how can one not be sympathetic for a team that came through the tragedies that battered their country in the 1990s, culminating with the assassination of Andres Escobar during WC1994? Who do I want to go through? Very, very tough, but I'm going to say Poland and Senegal. And because I want to, it will happen.

Let there be football and let us all cheer and get happy for countries we've barely heard of before. And for goodness' sake, let's fight all of our wars on a football pitch!

Go on Saudi Arabia!

Edge of Empire

S.J.A. Turney - Praetorian III: Eagles of Dacia, Mulcahy Books, 2017

There are two main reasons this book is special to me: it is the first time Simon writes about Dacia (and it's my first contemporary read about Dacia written by a non-Romanian) and I get a mention in the book dedications. While a huge honour and an unexpected surprise, I also believe this to be rather undeserved, though I shall accept it nonetheless.

After a quick rise through the ranks in the first book of the series and just as quick a fall from grace in the second, Gnaeus Rustius Rufinus is sent to Dacia in something that is halfway between a mission (to check the loyalty of the governors) and an exile (Cleander, the imperial chamberlain wanting to send him as far away as possible from Rome). It is this journey that is covered in the book, plus a whole bunch of trouble that Rufinus has a real talent for getting himself into.

Rufinus is accompanied by Senova, the freed slave girl he meets and falls in love with in the first book, and Acheron - the dog he acquires from the dead Sarmatian guard Dis, also in the first book. On the way they'll acquire a slave boy, Luca, putting the numbers of the travelling party up to 4 (5 if we consider Atalanta the mare). The journey starts immediately outside Dacia, in the province of Moesia, and so does the intrigue. An adventure full of twists and bumps follows, taking our heroes at the Northernmost reaches of the empire, followed by a journey down through barbarian lands and an unexpected end point. It's hard to speak too much about the plot without giving away the pleasure of discovering it, as Simon does a fine job of always adding unexpected turns. Therefore, even this is a book centered around a journey, there's plenty of adventure to be had on the way, peppered with the usual sieges, battles and fights.

I suppose one way of looking at the Praetorian series is that adventure is the substance being molded into the various shapes of each book: political intrigue in the first, addiction and fall from grace in the second, travelling and discovery of exotic lands in this third. And all of this is backed by Simon's excellent documentation and research, recreating the atmosphere of late 2nd century Rome in fine detail. This recreation of the atmosphere includes gems like 'They had acquired four local guards with unpronounceable names, only a dozen teeth between them and less command of Latin than your average pomegranate.' or 'A good punishment detail will change arms with each stroke so that the blows cross and do more harm.' They don't teach this kind of stuff in religious studies.

While all the story-lines in the Praetorian series are works of fiction, they are based around important historical events, and although we do not know of the historical existence of any Praetorian soldier called Rufinus, the historical characters in the books are captured not only accurately, but by giving them a real voice it becomes very easy to understand their thoughts and motivations. After we've met Marcus Aurelius and Commodus in the first book, Pertinax and Septimius Severus in the second, in Praetorian III we get introduced to two other Roman emperors, namely Clodius Albinus and Pescennius Niger, bringing the gallery of emperors in the Praetorian series up to an impressive six so far (although 3 of them will have a very short lived reign). But while the list of Roman Emperors reads Commodus (177-192) - Pertinax (193) - Didius Julianus (193) - Pescennius Niger (193) - Clodius Albinus (193) - Sepimius Severus (193-211), having them as characters in a book gives a better understanding of how the wheels of the 'great game' spin.

There are three elements that I particularly appreciate about Praetorian III, though I will only mention each of them without too much details, with a view to the same care I mentioned earlier, not to spoil the book for people who might read this review first:

 - the mirror journey: over the course of two weeks in April 2017 Simon took a trip largely along the route he will send Rufinus on, later in the year. There is a bonus feature in the book that makes the reader part of both adventures;

 - the gold mines plot: contemporary sources give the gold of the Western Carpathians as one of the main reasons for Trajan's invasion of Dacia. Impressive quantities of gold are mentioned in relation to Trajan's plundering of the province, but more impressive still is the fact that 19 centuries later Gabriel Resources spent an alleged $17 million in bribes for the rights to keep mining gold from a region where gold has been mined since Roman times. It is therefore right that the gold mines at Alburnus Maior feature heavily in the plot of Praetorian III and Simon has found a way to do this that is entirely believable.

 - the end twist: I will not say much about it, obviously, just that I am rather excited about Rufinus' new patron and I am therefore looking forward to Praetorian IV. Late 2018, I hear.

American burlesque

Liz Goldwyn - Pretty Things (The Last Generation of American Burlesque Queens), Regan, 2006

This is an excellent resource for anyone with an interest in burlesque as an art form, though unfortunately it falls short of being a great book in itself as the author hesitates between publishing a coffee table book, a costume note archive or a history of the movement.

I'm not a big fan or consumer of coffee table books, but I can understand their purpose. Pretty Things checks all the boxes of the definition of one such book, though it is larger in scope, aiming to document an entire cultural sub-genre. In the process of documenting the book, Liz Goldwyn stumbled upon a real treasure: Rex Huntington's books, notes and ledgers. Rex Huntington was one of the most prominent costume designers of the burlesque era, so his archive documents a lot of the burlesque dancers' measurements and designs. Therefore, for any burlesque scholar, this is an invaluable resource and publishing it in its entirety would have been an excellent idea, even if the appeal would have been a lot narrower. As it is, there are a lot more of Rex Huntington's notes being left out than there are included, which can be frustrating for the meticulous researcher.

Same goes for documenting the stories of burlesque dancers: due to editorial space limitations only a small number of pictures are included and the approach towards individual stories of the dancers is journalistic in style, too shallow and too brief to do them justice. 

This is still a great book and a must-read for anyone with a degree of involvement in the art, but IMHO it fails to engross the wider public. 

The book is divided in two sections, the first one documenting the craft of what was generally called burlesque in early 20th century America (with chapters dedicated to costumes, staging, dance, gimmicks, backstage life and a generic profiling of the burlesque dancer), whilst the second part is dedicated to individual stories (Betty & Dian Rowland, June St. Clair, Lois de Fee and Zorita).

To me, the second part is a lot more interesting, and the piecing together of the lives of these ladies from the elite of the craft provides a real insight into burlesque as it was 100 or so years ago. Each of their stories is interesting, each of them makes me want to know more about them. Would Miss Goldwyn venture to write full biographies for these ladies I wonder?

Quotes:

'What is there to like? Hairy chests? A limp joint? You like them because they're customers, because they admire you, because they applaud, because they spend their money to see you.'

In the early 1950s, Zorita had a child with her second husband, Pete Petillo ('the wop'). The marriage didn't last long, as Zorita wanted to get back to work. She took her daughter to the theater with her, adjusting her routine to include a new baby.

Zorita spoke of her career in burlesque with pride but was not particularly nostalgic for days long past. She kept many scrapbooks on the shelf and told me that until I asked her to pull them out, she hadn't looked at them in years. She said 'Wouldn't you hate to live with somebody that was so hung up on oneself that they were busy looking at scrapbooks all day long and telling you what a great act they were? I know I was good.'

Overcoming grief

Rio Ferdinand (with Decca Aitkenhead) - Thinking Out Loud, Hodder & Stoughton, 2017

Repeatedly, during the reading of the book and whilst attending its launch, I took the opportunity to mentally apologize to Rio for all the times I have judged him before understanding him. Luckily enough, he's been a good enough footballer that I have next to nothing to reproach him. Sure, there will always be THAT loss against Portsmouth in 2008, when we missed the chance of a second treble, but singling Rio out for it is too harsh to be accurate. No, no, I've never had an issue with Rio on a football pitch, the defender with the best placement I've ever seen, in the league with Maldini or Baresi.

The issues I've had with Rio, historically, are related to his apparent craving for media attention, the work put in developing the Rio Ferdinand brand sometimes seemingly being prioritized over the work of being the best possible Manchester United team player. It is the lot of the football fan, though, is it not? To hold his heroes to standards impossible to live up to. Once Rio left United for QPR, all of the silly grudges have gone. I've wanted the best for him and I really wanted him to do well at QPR, being very surprised when he didn't. Then one autumn day two years ago, while checking the BBC website for results I saw the news of his wife passing. It sent shock-waves down my spine and through the football world throughout. How can one protect oneself from such a tragedy? Why have I been so quick to judge his form without having any background?

Well, few can cope as well as Rio has. And this book tells the story of how he's done it. I have to admit, even when hearing about the documentary, then the book, I was suspicious. Is this banking on a tragedy? I know now that he's not that man. On the contrary. The documentary (which I am yet to see), the book and the talks Rio is currently doing in various locations are an altruistic enterprise. They're meant to share his experiences, his coping with tragedy, and in doing so, the hope is he'll help people who have or will experience similar traumatic experiences.

This is a football biography unlike any other football biography: the sport only stays in the background and despite the insights into Rio's footballing life, the book centers on his family life. Meeting Rebecca - his future wife, their years together, the tough time of acting as a single parent while his wife was being treated for cancer and finally, his struggle to keep going and having to fulfill, this time for good, the roles of both mum and dad for his three kids.

Sure, due to his footballing talents Rio has had, since his mid-teens, a privileged life, and he doesn't shy away from it. But looking too much at the story from this angle doesn't do justice to anyone, least so to Rio. Tragedy is tragedy, and no amount of wealth or social privilege can protect you from it.

Not having experienced a loss as big as Rio's, I don't know how it feels. But I know that if, God forbid, I would suffer such a loss, I'd like to have a book like this close. And I feel it is a great instrument and has the potential to help a lot of people that go through similar experiences.

I cried a number of times while reading it, and there's also a lot of cute moments in the book, specially when he talks about the relationship with his kids.

Writing this book has been an enormous act of courage for Rio and shows both his strength of characters and his generosity. It is a great read, and I now think of it as a very peculiar cross between biography, self-help book and great literature.

Having experienced the death of his mother less than two years after his wife's was soul-crushing even for me when hearing the news. I can only imagine how poor Rio must've felt. All the more admirable that he chose to go through with his projects, all the more admirable to see him weekly in Sky's pundit chair. Even with this review, I feel I've been too harsh with a very admirable man and a great footballer. I'll end with a little story that is, I think, illustrative for Rio's character:

Earlier this month, when attending the launch of the book, we were told that a book is included in the price of the ticket, but there will be no signings, autograph sessions or photo-ops. And it was indeed an unfitting atmosphere for a meet-up between a footballer and his fans: most people in the audience were either recently bereaved or healthcare professionals, Rio's family and close friends were there and yes, there were a few Manchester United jerseys in the room, but they were in no way a focus. At the end, however, ignoring the organizer's advice and venue security's orders, Rio stayed and signed all the books that he was requested to, took all the pictures with everyone who asked him to and was generally an all-round gracious host.

I now feel sorry for ever being judgmental about Rio. Whenever I see him nowadays, whether on TV or in a picture, I just want to give him a big hug.

Edinburgh Fringe 2017

Reuben Kaye

I fully realise it's late in the game and most performers are already drawing lines and doing sum-ups of their EdFringe2017 run, so this listing of the shows I've seen this year might not mean much. I am, however, doing it, partly to relive what have been a very fun 3 days, partly to give a plug (such as it is) to all the shows.

I am going to speak about the shows I did not particularly like as well, in the hope that any publicity is good publicity, and also being fully aware that the reception of a show is entirely subjective and even if one particular audience member did not enjoy one particular performance, this is by no means a reflection on the quality of a show. Maybe the respective audience member would enjoy a different performance, or maybe it's just not part of the right audience of the show.

The Omnitorium's Rotating Roster of Erudite Amusements and Motley Delights - *** this is a variety show hosted by Dan Lees and Neil Frost of The Establishment, a comedy group I have seen on a few previous occasion and I always found funny, even though in front of a rarefied audience of a very rainy Monday evening they had moments where they didn't seem to bother all that much. It was, nevertheless an enjoyable show with a decent line-up of acts, two of which really stood out. One is Michael Brunstrom's Parsley, an absurdist comedy about the homonym vegetable. Judging by the 10 minute spot he did, the full show is much funnier than it sounds. The second was Christel Bartelse, a Canadian mask performer whose spot was interesting enough to make me want to know more, though I think it was also quite different to the full show she has on.

The Red Emerald: A Farce for the Colourblind - ** Now, there's nothing particularly wrong with this farcical comedy from a debut company. The script is crafted well enough and the play has a lot of funny moments, but the lack of experience shows through all the cracks in the production. My main objection is the fact that on the whole, the production does not bring anything new, does not contribute to the theatrical craft. It felt a lot like a graduation showcase and, whilst I'm sure there's an audience for light entertainment plays in the traditional vein, I much prefer a script that is trying to bring something new, to challenge an established assumption or norm, such as...

The Last Days of Judas Iscariot - **** Although not a perfect script, the premises of this play strikes a chord with me and I greatly enjoyed Parallax Theatre's production. Very effective set design and some very well written and acted parts (I particularly enjoyed Satan and Fabiana). I have some objections to some of the directorial choices and I would've reworked the lighting quite substantially, but this is nevertheless a powerful piece of theatre and I want to take an in-depth look at the script soon.

Radu Isac: One Romanian Answering Questions - * First stand-up I witnessed and the only piece that was part of the Free Fringe. I was quite excited by the prospect of Romania being represented in the comedy scene of the festival, but unfortunately Radu's show disappointed me. The lazy writing and poor delivery are not redeemed by the odd funny line, whilst the irresponsible approach to some of the motifs treated (immigration, unemployment, environment) made me want to leave the room sooner than I did. Which was before the end of the show anyway.

Sage Francis and B Dolan Present: Tricknology - *** The crazy, dynamic, loud 'mish mash of nonsense' that Sage Francis and B Dolan brought to Edinburgh left me baffled. I KINDA get it, but at the same time I'm not really sure there is much to get. This is absurdist comedy delivered at the pace of high intensity hip-hop battles with a clear protest message, though without a clear aim. I suppose there is a lot more in this show for the hip-hop fans than it was for me. Also, the fact I got in expecting to see a typical hip-hop concert didn't do much for my understanding of the piece.

My Leonard Cohen - *** Stewart D'Arietta is undoubtedly a big Leonard Cohen fan. But his re-orchestrated songs sound more like a cross between Tom Waits and Emir Kusturica with Leonard Cohen lyrics. A good night out, for sure, but the more purists of LC's fans will find plenty to protest in D'Arietta's music. I didn't manage to see the other LC tribute, I am curious how they compare mythologies.

Reuben Kaye - ***** Sure, I can be accused of bias, as I've been working with Reuben for two years. But come on! When the 5 stars reviews are pouring in from every direction, when the whole festival is buzzing with word of how great Reuben's show is and when he is in contention for a number of awards after collecting a few in Australia and London already, you know he must be doing something right. Reuben is a cabaret genius, a great voice and an overflowing fountain of creativity. Not a foot is set wrong in this show, not a breath is out of place. Seamless interaction with the audience, funny beyond compere and subversive by merely existing, this show is one of a kind. If you're only going to see two shows at this year's fringe, go see Reuben twice.

Kaitlyn Rogers: Can I Get an Amen?! - *** self-crowned queen of sass, Kaitlyn Rogers is an Australian glittery clown-comedian with a love of Whoopi Goldberg wisdom and Destiny's Child empowerment. Excellent show and a funny night, made mostly by Kaitlyn's bubbly personality. I do object to the written material, which is rather sketchy, but I put this down to the lack of experience. Once she'll polish and improve the writing, we'll have a hell of a show on our hands.

Lilith: The Jungle Girl - **** Lilith was one of the most visible shows at the fringe and undoubtedly one of the strongest productions. I loved the unashamed gender bending visible in both script and casting (the assistant, played by a woman, is in love with the professor, played by a woman, who is in love with the jungle girl, played by a man). There is a strong message in this script and some very bold morality. What can I do, I'm a sucker for a good questioning of established facts ('What is nationality if not just a collection of empty symbols and conventions?')

EntryNOEntry - *** I was well impressed with the overall look of the Sri Lankan pavilion that the Colombo Art Biennale set up at the ground floor of Summerhall. And I enjoyed the weirdness of Venuri Perera's one-on-one performance art piece, specially as it's the first of this kind I ever experienced. I'm withholding the fourth star solely because while the debate on the meanings and merits of citizenship Venuri puts forward is more than necessary, she is too quick and too categorical in assuming a position and thus it doesn't leave a lot of space for dialogue.

When We Ran - ** Unnecessarily complicated and a strong feeling of wasted potential is my harsh and off-hand verdict on this show. A promising script but a lot of very wrong directorial and design choices. I'm hoping the company will enjoy box-office success, as they seem to have invested quite a bit in what attempts to be a high end production, but I also think sometimes a play is better served by embracing the scarcity of means that characterizes the theatrical art form. I have heard good things about Patch of Blue Theatre and I want to see more of their work, but I'm hoping it will be better than this.

Brutal Cessation - **** By contrast to the above, Brutal Cessation achieves more than it sets out to. I am a fan of Beth Pitts' previous work and directorial style and this play holds up to her standards. There are multiple layers to the script and I was still discovering them a couple of days after watching the play. I loved the fast pace, the precision of the delivery and the efficiency of the relatively minimalistic but very smart set design. If there is fairness in the world, then I think Beth Pitts is destined for big things and I count myself lucky to have worked with her.

Carla Lippis – Cast a Dark Shadow - **** I was hesitant before seeing this as people whose opinion I respect propped Carla so high up that they've rather dis-serviced the show. Luckily enough, the praise holds water. Carla has a great voice and she is backed by two great musicians, one of which (Vicky Falconer) surprised me with the multi-faceted nature of her musical talents. I do protest to the dark nature of the songs and I think this would be better received if it were a late night slot rather than a 6pm. But I clearly understand how this choice can be quite a luxury at the fringe.

Gillian Cosgriff: To the Moon and Back - **** Gillian was part of my endeavour to see more female comedy, after a quick look through the festival programme left me appalled at the large number of white male comedians and the under-representation of women in comedy. Gillian is a cool Aussie chick who does comedy songs, something that I have seen before on the cabaret circuit, but not so much in stand-up. There is some solid, thoroughly researched and well written material in there, specifically in the first half. Some points are scored on costumes as well, though there is a clear dip in the second half of the show, once the talk about marriage begins. I suspect this has to do with the topic being too personal and the fear that the jokes might strike too close to home. Write what you know, but not what you care about?

Wild Bore - ***** As the Australian third of this show would say, YASSS! This is it! For anyone who's looking for a change in theatrical paradigm, look no further! This show is not subversive, it's the glorious revolution marching vigorously on the capital of established canon. Wild Bore enlarges the participatory nature of the theatrical act to include not only the audience, but also the critics, publicists and front of house staff. And it's mostly the critics that will be uncomfortable with this 180 degrees turning of the lamps, that's why most of them didn't seem to know how to respond to it. But this is not as much a fight back as it is an open hand, an invitation to dialogue that can take place both on and off the stage. And although very much included in the conversation, the almost to capacity audience in Traverse Theatre's main auditorium did not look uncomfortable at all, on the contrary. Saying too much about it spoils the fun, so I'm not going to talk about the apparent reasons behind the dramaturgical intentions of the show, but rather invite everyone to see it. I'm looking forward for it to come to London in October, when I suspect I will attend more than once.

Late'n'Live - * My presence to the Late'n'Live is the victory of stubbornness over wisdom. There might be a context when Late'n'Live is fun (in a large group, drunk and without much to worry for the next day), but when I saw it, in the Wednesday of the third week, it was a good reflection of everything that's boring about the festival: 5 comedians, all male, all white and all past the point of even trying to be funny, preoccupied - above all - of dragging as much as possible to fill up the allocated slot. I will not bother to remember any of their names, though I will say the only one who had a whiff of funny about him was the big gay dude from Glasgow talking about his HIV-positive diagnostic. Too bad he was the most heckled, too. It would appear shows do tend to attract the audiences they deserve. For the three hours I spent there I feel deserving of a medal, although quite what compelled me to stay that long I couldn't say. The vain attempt to get at least part of my ticket money's worth back, perhaps?

There we are, this was my EdFringe2017 and I was hesitant in making all of this public as the last thing I want is to upset any of my friends who might find themselves mentioned above. But being the eternal optimist that I am, I'm counting on their intelligence being stronger than their ego.

Other quick points from the festival:
 - too much Trump. Way too much. The less talked about, the smaller he becomes. Let ignoring be a form of resistance;
- much of the same goes for Brexit, though I don't deny satire can play a part in the resistance. Good satire though, the kind of which coat-tailing very rarely is;
- open the festival magazine anywhere in the comedy section and you'll see a bunch of white dudes with the odd woman thrown in. Women are funny, funnier than men more often than not. Also, there is no direct connection between genitalia and the sense of humour. But most of the dudes don't even seem to be trying. Audiences too forgiving maybe?
- I've seen a lot of good stuff, not sure if that's to do with the overall quality or my ability to choose.
- delighted to see cabaret having such a strong presence. Not sure if it's always been like that or if I see it more now.

All in all, Edinburgh Fringe is great. Looking forward to next year!

X out of X

S.J.A. Turney - Marius' Mules X: Fields of Mars, Victrix Books, 2016

 Reviewing the tenth book in a series is really just for people who are already familiar with the series to some degree. If you're not familiar with Simon's Marius' Mules (the Falerii saga) I shall refer you to the first book. But be prepared for a binge read of 10+1 volumes, to which Simon says will add another five books. I don't personally agree with his idea of sticking religiously to the timeline of Caesar's diaries as some years of the Gallic wars are rather uneventful, whereas the year of the Arveni revolt could easily fill two or three volumes. Nor am I too happy about the prospect of the series ending with Caesar's assassination (oh, yeah, spoiler, Caesar dies in 44 BC). Because regardless of how it might've started out, this is not the story of Julius Caesar, but of Marcus Falerius Fronto and maybe, just maybe, the saga of the Falerii, depending on how much convincing Simon will need in a few years' time, once he has ran past the events on the Ides of March. What will Fronto do during the battle of Philippi for instance, a real war of brothers, where friends of his will be pitted against each other? What about Actium? Will he manage to be neutral in the battle that marks the de facto end of the Republic? I guess we shall have to wait and see.

In the meanwhile, Fields of Mars is Simon's treatment of 49 BC, the first year of the Civil War that will see the end of the First Triumvirate. It is the year of the Rubicon crossing (along with the famous 'Alea jacta est') and the year by whose end Caesar will secure the loyalty of Italia and Hispania, thus controlling what will later be known as the Western Roman Empire and setting up the decisive clash with Pompey in Greece. 

Unlike the Gallic wars, this is a civil war and will therefore involve as much diplomacy as it will need fighting. Simon, who clearly enjoys writing the latter more, is bemoaning the fact, although I think he does a pretty fine job writing negotiations and politics and it keeps an alert pace throughout the book, even though yes, the maneuvering takes more pages than the actual fighting.

I remember reading Caesar's diaries and being impressed with the siege works built for the taking of Massilia. All of it is well fleshed by Simon, though only after he decides to take Fronto on a tour of Hispania through which his sword gets bloodied a lot less than we're used to.

But there's two major achievements here that make the volume stand out within the series: 

1. The Naval Battle of Massilia. It is, as far as I remember, the biggest naval conflagration Fronto has come across so far and Simon proves he is just as ease writing naval strategy as he is writing field battles or sieges. There's some really spectacular pages there, once again the entertainment factor being doubled by a great history and military history lesson, just as Simon's extremely exhaustive knowledge of the period - in full display here - is double by a very gifted pen.

2. Salvius Cursor. This is a fictional character, and a new addition to the impressive panoply of figures and archetypes of the era. Because Fronto needs an antagonist while Caesar is too edgy and there's not enough fighting to pick someone from the opposing side, it is the legatus' second in command that serves as opposing pole to our man from Puteoli here. I don't want to give too much away, but just like with Cavarinos in The Great Revolt, Simon achieves an impressive feat in creating a character that walks many miles in the grey area between positive and negative without ever really touching its black and white borders. Applying modern military norms, I'm tempted to say Salvius' insubordination would have brought him a much swifter exit either via a metallic tip or via stripping of any sort of military capacity, which tends to happen once a direct order is disobeyed. For the sake of a good read, however, I am tempted to grant this suspension of belief, if only to satisfy my curiosity as to where this feisty tribune will eventually end up.

Another cute addition - and it'd be really funny if this were in any way true - is the Gallic Defense Fund, chests of treasure that allegedly were meant to secure Rome against a further Gallic invasion. Along with other artefacts such as 'legion eagles from the time of the war against Carthage', this has gathered dust in the cellars of the Temple to Saturn ever since the time of Brennus and all the way up to it being plundered by Fronto. Come on, is our legate not at the very center of history?

And I shall end my review with a few nuggets of Julian wisdom, via the Turney spectacles:

'Unprepared men lose wars, Fronto' - Caesar acknowledging the de facto state of war.

'I do not like to leave things to chance if I have the option to prepare.' - this reminded me of a favourite Arab saying of mine: 'Put your faith in Allah, but make sure you tied your camel.'

'I have no wish to come between a man and his conscience' - Caesar letting go of Labienus. Titus Labienus' appearance in Caesar's diaries during Civil Wars is so brief that the rift must've been painful. very curious how Simon will handle it.

'First we deal with an army without a general. Then we can deal with the general without an army.' - another reminder of another quote I enjoy, this time by Alexander, allegedly ahead of the battle of Gaugamela: 'I do not fear an army of lions led by a sheep. I fear an army of sheep led by a lion.'

So there. If you haven't read MM so far, go back to book 1, you've got some ground to make up. If you're up to date, join the crowd in awaiting for Marius' Mules XI. Coming 2018, 2066 years after the fact.