v {figsrmu a .. w maegfismhflfifi

Never the Twains shall I meet. Neither Mark (I Feel Like A Writer) nor Shania. And probably never John Wayne's grandchildren. If it were a wager between either the Twains or Wayne's wains' wains, there would really not be a wager, I bet. To say, obviously Mark Twain is dead; lost so much weight



Om >2

E > —< Z

grew not so muckle but very, very thin. So all my hopes are pinned deeply onto meeting Shania; yet

even running into her I l N K would hardly be likely O

and scarcely be likely

to be called a E 'meeting', unless that S H

is just exactly what it

was. T H

So out of those two A Twains, and there are more, it is more L possible that I run into Shania Twain, T H although if I did I'm J not sure I could distinguish her from E her identical brother Shane, as he has long 6 N D curly teeth like her too, although I am sure that someone would be sure to point out which one was which to me if I asked, but I might not ask and even if I did there may not be anyone there able to help, or there could be someone there, able to help yet they just mightn‘t hear me ask, if I did.

Either way he's got more of a chance than Mark, Shane has, of being met by me. Shane has also got more chance than I have of bumping into the grandWaynes, he’s always out and about shouting Shane Twain is and so he's probably got more chance of bumping into those Waynes, or the Waynes into Shane, than either myself or Shania Twain. Whether or not he would have

any or more idea than myself as to the surname of their grandfather, or the surname ,. of any other people he ' runs into, is open to debate. Mind you there would be more chance of me knowing that these two twin Twains were who they were, if I met them, than I would of knowing that any of the grand wains are in fact here and now and are very very famous, just I not with any mention of the name John Wayne. They could of course be famous in themselves in addition to being know as Big John's grandwains and yet I know of none. I'm sure they are not vain, the Waynes and would not advertise; I am sure they can’t be as vain as Shania's twin, Shane.


Is it more likely that they are more vain than either Twain than it is likely that they aren't?

As it stands it is doubtful that the Waynes are well known without anyone knowing they are Wayne's grandchildren and so it is more possible that they are just simply not known to us and therefore it is more likely that I could meet them and never even know that they were indeed absolutely the Waynes than meet them and know they were Waynes.

I know you are all thinking what I am thinking: which of these few variations is more likely to be I S most likely:

R To have met a Wayne than a Twain. To have met a Wayne, not known as a Wayne, than E met a Twain. To meet a Wayne, known as a Wayne, E than a Twain. To meet a Twain, Shania or Shane, not Mark, than any Wayne. Than some Waynes. To have met some Waynes and Twains and never knew it. To have met all the Waynes in the same room as the Twains and never knew. That it is more likely to have met a Wayne and know it was a Wayne than met and not known.

That it is more likely that this is more likely.

lam still not sure which is more likely, meeting either the Twains or neither the Twains nor neither of these, compared to meeting a Wayne.

I wonder do the Twains have children; not together obviously, and if they did it is probable that we would not know them as the incestuous Twain twin wains, they would be hidden. In fact it is more likely, I would imagine, that we would be more likely to be aware of the identity of those pesky Wayne children than the unusual hypothetical offspring of the Twains. There could be more than one, the offspring may be twins too, and they may be separated at or after birth; and never those Twains would meet, a forced refrain of Twain from Twain.

Just to say it clearly; I think it is more likely for me to meet Shania Twain than Shane and more likely to meet them than one of John Wayne's grandchildren, whether I know them as a Wayne or not.

This started out as an exercise in logic/illogic and opened up a whole other kettle of what is likely and probable and grades of possibility.

Essentially what is more likely: something happening or something not happening?

Is it more likely that I would ask that question than that I wouldn’t, because the question can only exist in being asked?

Is this rhetorical?


Zinnie Harris

And who might she be? A playwright whose star us very much rn the ascendant, Harris rs fast becoming one of the most pr()lll1( and rn-demand writers on the theatrical (rrcurt.

Anything I might have seen? Could be. Her play By Many Wounds was performed at Glasgows Tron last year before travelling down to Hampstead where It was nominated for two awards But rt's what lres ahead that’s most interesting

Such as? Edinburgh International Festival commissioned Harris to write Gravrty, a ‘text wrth mUSIC' opening later this month, her play Further Than The Furthest Thrng won the much coveted Peggy Ramsay award and has just gone rnto (o- productron wrth London's National Theatre, her radio play SI/VOT Wha/e F/s‘h Will be transrnrtted on Radio 4 m lllld July, her writer-rn-resrdente pos:tron With the Royal Shakespeare Company should bear frtnt In lllt‘ll(?Xl l\\1‘lV(‘Ill(HlillS (u:(l tnttrtVs (art(“n: commission for london's Royal Court next autumn Bit on the lazy side then? Well, despite llTIS huge outpouring, Harns (larrns not to be a ‘.'.'orl<aholr( ‘l HGVQI\VTHOIIK)H‘ih(Hl(NK‘S(OIK‘J oay,tnats(ut absolute rule,’ she says 'So If I get to the end of a scene and I've only been writing for an hour, I stop. Most days I only write for about two hours So what does she do with the rest of her time? ‘i tend to fill my days mth bits of teatltrng, (lzrettzr‘g and Other stuff, just to stay sane ()tltt‘r‘\.‘.':'s(‘ you just get lonely and fed up ' «Kelly Apter»

Gravrty tours Edinburgh, Gld8()()\‘.’ and Starlrr‘g l.". early June; Further Than The Furthest Th/ng ,o/ays the Ed/nburgh Frrnge th/s' August before appear/rig at the Tron Theatre, G/asg(;'.‘/

! \i .I (-x\ I . I ——~) r—t: Cy». .3 ‘l '- l ,2 r :41 :u: r. a, l "\,./‘l ~ L N\ a; .2! .t .r' .0. “T‘ f ,/ i" r' l I (/N.‘ i 5 r ‘\ l: l..- l- l l l \ L. \n'l ‘x/ I l' l l { \ r g ', S ‘O‘ll-x ts'él \4 l V1 i l... 1‘ \ l y 5.1 “.1, -‘r. I i 5 --- ’y I, f" [f \V " W‘ l F" r ‘f‘ F r w) a. i l I \. l J K , m a r“ ,1; r .. r r“ r“ r 1.- >2. \

Stuart Murdoch on Steps, see page 18.