Famous Fodder

Do they really need to refer to themselves as celebrity chefs? Is that combination of brands really necessary? I mean if a chef appears on TV who is famous for being a chef, well then he is just a chef. I don’t need to be instructed that he is indeed a celebrity. I figured that bit out for myself when I recognized him, thus qualifying him as a celebrity.

I mean Robbie Williams would not be introduced on a chat show as a “celebrity musician” or Ashley Cole as a “celebrity footballer”. We know he’s a footballer, we recognized him therefore he’s a celebrity footballer. But we’re all comfortable leaving the celebrity bit out, so he’s a footballer.

Not so with chefs. The rules state that we must always refer to Gordon Ramsay and Marco Pierre White as celebrity chefs. Never as just a chef or just a celebrity. Always a celebrity chef.

You can view them as celebrities who happen to chefs or chefs who happen to be celebrities, but always celebrity chefs. Because to attain the status of a celebrity is one laudable thing indeed and to become a chef is in itself quite a feat but to fuse the two into one omnipotent entity is surely the pinnacle of human achievement. As good as it gets.

It’s one thing to be able to chop an onion very quickly, it’s quite another to be globally recognized as one who can chop an onion very quickly.

Futureshock - They Haven't A Clue

The ESRI are today predicting a return to meaningful growth in 2012 “barring any unforeseen circumstances”. In 2012 when we are still mired in this unprecedented slump I wonder what type of events will qualify as unforeseen circumstances. Bohemians losing at home to Dundalk in the Cup? A cold sore epidemic at the Blarney Stone? The Urlingford by pass? Oh to be an economic forecaster, how do I go about landing a gig like that? This might happen, that might happen, then again the other might happen. Oh look lunchtime already.