Only painters and slackers like an extra sixty minutes of daylight. The farce of daylight saving time

So then, this time next month, what time will it be? What do we do on Sunday 25 October – do we have to turn the clocks back an hour or not? With three weeks to go until the now-traditional time change (we’ve been doing this every year since 1966, although the very first time was in 1916), the debate between summer time and standard time has flared up again this year. Experts say there are no benefits to changing the time; we should just choose one and stick to it. All hell breaks loose: making even the clock a subject of debate and discussion is yet another mistake of our now ridiculous civilisation. (Incidentally, the European Parliament apparently decided a few years ago, following a public consultation, to abolish daylight saving time; I don’t understand why we’re still here discussing it). Doctors, on scientific grounds, say we should choose standard time; Trump and the Lega, on the other hand, want daylight saving time, because – as the US President says – with more daylight, people can do more sport and there will be less crime (from which we can deduce that Trump has always lived in the dark, given that in his life he has done exactly the opposite).

Given the entirely arbitrary arguments put forward by those who promote summer time, I too shall enter the fray – but in support of standard time. Daylight saving time, with its clock hands being moved forward by an hour in the dead of night—like a Gestapo round-up—has always been the cause of a nagging drowsiness that clouds the mind for days on end and is impossible to shake off; at best, after a month, this uncontrolled narcolepsy turns into a cognitive slowdown that leads to utter senility. Worse than those who ask, ‘What are you doing on New Year’s Eve?’, are those who ask, ‘What time is it?’ during daylight saving time: more often than not, it is a trick question. Time is relative, Einstein used to say (to excuse himself when he was late); but with daylight saving time, relativity is taken to extremes, giving rise to an internal time zone – a temporal collapse perfectly exemplified by those who, when stating the time, specify ‘it’s four o’clock, but it would be three’, thus plunging you into temporal arbitrariness and, from there, a step away from losing your sense of self.

If all this were not sufficient evidence to bring the proponents of daylight saving time to justice, there is also scientific evidence showing how much daylight saving time increases the risk of a heart attack or stroke – the only ones spared are those without a circadian rhythm, namely night owls, early risers or slackers. Not to mention children and the elderly, who may confuse day for night, and to whom the clock seems to prove them right for about six months. The additional daylight gained through daylight saving time is often criticized as a farce: unless one is an Impressionist painter devoted to sunsets or plein air landscapes, an extra hour of sunlight merely adds sixty more minutes of risk of sunstroke. Many people do not desire longer days; if anything, they prefer shorter ones—they feel they have already endured enough of these seemingly endless, relentless days. Any energy savings—assuming they exist, given air-conditioners running non-stop—are offset by price increases. One need not be a prohibitionist to oppose the legalisation of daylight saving time; instead, at the cry of ‘If not now, then solar time!’, hurl your alarm clock against the wall when it goes off at seven, when in reality it is only six.