Crisp day on Saturday, went to London, a city I have mixed emotions towards, scene of various set pieces at university which are both great and foul, big pumping city struggling under the weight of its history and the fact that nothing seems to have topped it since the war, unless you include some shiz like the swinging sixties, but was that really any better than the decadent nineties, or the cash haemophilliac noughties (I don’t know if that phrase works but I’m not going to change it cos I like the idea and if you’d like to correct me then go ahead, I’m less of a grammar junkie than I wos. See?). So yeah, London is dwarfed by it’s history, and maybe that’s why all Londoners appear to be clunges of the highest order, as they try to feed the chip on their shoulders – you can’t feed a chip but hey – and perhaps that’s why I love/hate it. In fact, it’s not really love/hate, it’s more couldn’t/give/a/shit. But there is some good stuff there – and on Saturday the little lady and I went to the british museum to see the Hadrian exhib and the Hayward gallery to see Warhol. Good shiz, amazing to see – the Hadrian shiz especially; that shit is so old, and so well preserved, and so well crafted and just perfectly chiseled. All these big statues just look like they were made out of clay in the back room yesterday, imagine creating something that lasting. And you don’t even know who made them. I think I’d want my name to last too, but maybe that’s the point. Talking about statues, when we were in Manchester, Jenny noticed how all the statues up north are of tradesmen, and mill owners and big sidied, big bellied landowners, compared to southern statues which are all statesmen and politicians. It’s a different world really. I suppose they always were. Back in London, the Warhol exhibition at the Hayway was good, althoughi had seen a lot of it before in the Tate show about 6 or 7 years ago. I didn’t feel particularly touched by it then and I felt the same this time. I like the idea of Warhol, I like his mission, but it doesn’t really resonate with me. It’s making art out of popular culture (to put it in it’s simplest b&w) which has virtue, but do we really need it as an art form? I mean it’s there already – it’s already documented because it’s all around us. Does it need to be put in a gallery? I mean I like it – I’m not dissing it – but I don’t think it’s all that- I prefer Liechtenstein, more than anything because of his scale.