Naming individuals can be stupid

In my land of birth, Australia, an incredible problem has always existed. People often don't have the courage to use officially-given names. They replace them by shortened versions or colloquial names. And this trivial refusal to use correct names has ended up undermining whatever's left of everyday culture Down Under. I imagine that most outsiders are unaware of this ridiculous problem, which has attained astronomical proportions. Many silly terms substituted for given names are absurd, and have weak linguistic links to the original names, or maybe none at all. Here are several examples:

William > "Bill"

Margaret > "Peggy"

Richard > "Dick"

Susan > "Sue"

James > "Jim"

Catherine > "Kitty"

Robert > "Bob"

Dorothy > "Dot"

Thomas > "Tom"

Michael > "Mick"

This Aussie naming phenomenon has little to do with endearment or brevity. It's simply a silly habit that can neither be explained nor shaken off. I'm unaware of any academic thesis in Australian sociology that has traced the history and consequences of this ridiculous phenomenon. Australians themselves are generally so accustomed to this national absurdity that they rarely even think of it. It's what being an Aussie is all about. You either like it, ignore it or you leave.

This ridiculous habit in Australian society has annoying consequences. For example, some former friends in Australia get annoyed when I tell them that my official name has always been William Skyvington. They're so accustomed to antiquated nicknames from my school years that, when I point out that they should cease to call me "Bill" or "Billy", they see me as a snob. Some even get upset, and go out of their way to tell me that I'm an asshole. The most amazingly ridiculous case took place a few days ago, quite by chance. I had been in constant contact for many months with an Australian female school-friend named "Jan" (no doubt an abbreviation for Janet). At one stage, I happened to be repeating my negative opinions about the weak state of Australian journalism. My quite objective statements surely offended the lady, and she wanted to let me know that I'd hurt her. And how did she get her message across to me? Believe it or not, she suddenly decided spontaneously—for the first time since the start of our e-mail communications, many months ago—to drop my William name and address me as... "Bill". Who was the true dumb asshole? Me or her? I'll let you decide.

Journalists in my upside-down world

Everybody knows that people in the Antipodes walk on their heads, because they live in an upside-down world. It's true that my Antipodean land of birth, Australia, is quite different to my adopted country, France.

• Australia is thought of as an immensely rich land, since all kinds of treasures lie beneath the surface. On the other hand, Australian history and culture are not particularly exciting. The Aborigines, for example, have never produced any written texts. So, it's as if the past only came into human memory a few generations ago. We know next to nothing about their ancient history. Aborigines themselves have invented myths about the past, but they have no precise objective knowledge of the names or life-styles of their ancestors. They simply guess. And their conclusions are probably right, because Australian Aborigines are a people that doesn't seem to evolve considerably in time.

• France, on the other hand, cannot be thought of as a rich land, since there are few treasures beneath the surface of our land. Our treasures are above the surface, in our history, culture and, above all, our people.

Normally, one would expect that a rich country such as Australia would send many journalists to a land such as France, to keep in touch with what's happening here. Similarly, one might expect that a less wealthy nation such as France would run into financial problems in trying to maintain journalists in a faraway land such as Australia. Actual reality is exactly the opposite. France attempts constantly to find out what's happening in Australia. On the contrary, Australia depends on foreign sources of information to find out what's happening, say, in France. We live indeed in an upside-down world.

New Hillary look

Click here to see Hillary, on a Melbourne wall, changing from a bikini to more modest dress. Sadly, this wasn't just a case of somebody having fun. Local authorities in this Melbourne municipality requested the update for moral reasons. Shame on you, Down Under!

Faster than we thought

An Australian climate scientist has just made a sobering statement: “We never thought the Great Barrier Reef was going to die completely by the 2030s. If that’s true, it’s a lot faster than we thought.” He reveals above all that alleged thinking on this theme has been badly wrong.

Click here to access a grim story on this calamity in The Guardian. One of their innocent readers suggested that Australians should be taxed to cover the costs of protecting the coral. That's a bit like saying that Aussies should have their heads read for not looking into this tragedy earlier on... and for persisting in believing, among certain "experts", that it's no more than a hoax.

Australian newspaper refuses to believe facts about problems of the Great Barrier Reef

Click here to access a shocking piece of bad journalism. Queensland's Courier Mail simply refuses to face scientific facts concerning the disastrous coral bleaching that has hit the Great Barrier Reef. This is an appalling example of idiotic "thinking" in Australia. Unfortunately, there is so much intellectual mindlessness and stupidity of this kind in Australia that I'm not convinced that the nation will survive for long.

Sad Australian ballad

Click the YouTube icon

Sent to me by my childhood friend Bruce Hudson