Thursday 26 January 2012

Noel

Filed under: art,people,writing - the tops — Tags: , — Peter Monro @ 7:53 pm

Noel Coward

For 50 years, he was England’s most famous playwright, composer, director, actor and singer, known for his wit, flamboyance, style, clipped enunciation, silk dressing gown, cigarette holder, pose and poise.

In one of his productions Claudette Colbert was having trouble with the dialogue:

‘Oh Noel, I am terribly sorry. I knew the lines backwards before I arrived.’

‘I don’t want you to say them backwards. I want you to say them ****ing forwards.’


The Stately Homes Of England
is one of the best known of his hundreds of  songs:

Lord Elderley, Lrd Borrowmere,
Lord Sickert and Lord Camp,
With every virtue, every grace,
Ah what avails the sceptred race,
Here you see-the four of us,
And there are so many more of us
Eldest sons that must succeed.
We know how Caesar conquered Gaul
And how to whack a cricket ball;
Apart from this, our education lacks co-ordination.
Though we’re young and tentative
And rather rip-representative,
Scions of a noble breed,
We are the products of those homes serene and stately
Which only lately
Seem to have run to seed.

The Stately Homes of England,
How beautiful they stand,
To prove the upper classes
Have still the upper hand;
Though the fact that they have to be rebuilt
And frequently mortgaged to the hilt
Is inclined to take the gilt
Off the gingerbread,
And certainly damps the fun
Of the eldest son-
But still we won’t be beaten,
We’ll scrimp and scrape and save,
The playing fields of Eton
Have made us frightfully brave-
And though if the Van Dycks have to go
And we pawn the Bechstein Grand,We’ll stand
By the Stately Homes of England.

Here you see
The pick of us,
You may be heartily sick of us,
Still with sense
We’re all imbued.
Our homes command extensive views
And with assistance from the Jews
We have been able to dispose of
Rows and rows and rows of
Gainsboroughs and Lawrences,
Some sporting prints of Aunt Florence’s,
Some of which were rather rude.
Although we sometimes flaunt our family conventions,
Our good intentions
Mustn’t be misconstrued.

The Stately Homes of England
We proudly represent,
We only keep them up for
Americans to rent,
Though the pipes that supply the bathroom burst
And the lavatory makes you fear the worst,
It was used by Charles the First
Quite informally,
And later by George the Fourth
On a journey north.
The State Apartments keep their
Historical renown,
It’s wiser not to sleep there
In case they tumble down’
But still if they ever catch on fire
Which, with any luck, they might
We’ll fight For the Stately Homes of England

The Stately Homes of England,
Though rather in the lurch,
Provide a lot of chances
For Psychical Research-
There’s the ghost of a crazy younger son
Who murdered, in thirteen fifty-one,
An extremely rowdy Nun
Who resented it,
And people who come to call
Meet her in the hall.
The baby in the guest wing,
Who crouches by the grate,
Was walled up in the west wing
In fourteen twenty-eight.
If anyone spots
The Queen of Scots
In a hand-embroidered shroud
We’re proud
Of the Stately Homes of England.

Lord Elderley, Lord Borrowmere,
Lord Sickert and Lord Camp,
Behold us in our hours of ease,
Uncertain, coy and hard to please.
Reading in Debrett of us,
This fine Patrician quartette of us,
We can feel extremely proud,
Our ancient lineage we trace
Back to the cradle of the Race
Before those beastly Roman bowmen
Bitched our local Yeomen.
Through the new democracy
May pain the old Aristocarcy
We’ve not winced nor cried aloud,
Under the bludgeonings of chance what will be- will be.
Our heads will still be
Bloody but quite unbowed.

The Stately Homes of England
In valley, dale and glen
Produce a race of charming,
Innocuous young men.
Though our mental equipment may be slight
And we barely distinguish left from right,
We are quite prepared to fight
For our principles,
Though none of us know so far
What they really are.
Our duty to the nation,
It’s only fair to state,
Lies not I pro-creation
But what we pro-create;
And so we can cry
With kindling eye
As to married like we go,
What ho !
For the Stately Homes of England!

The Stately Homes of England,
Although a trifle bleak,
Historically speaking,
Are more or less unique.
We’ve a cousin who won the Golden Fleece
And a very peculiar fowling-piece
Which was sent to Cromwell’s niece,
Who detested it,
And rapidly sent it back
With a dirty crack.
A note we have from Chaucer
Contains a bawdy joke.
We also have a saucer
That Bloody Mary broke.
We’ve two pairs of tights
King Arthur’s Knights
Had completely worn away.
Sing Hey !
For the Stately Homes of England.

The Stately Homes of England,
Tho’ rather on the blink
Provide a lot of reasons
For what we do and think.
Tho’ we freely admit we may be wrong,
Our conviction that we are right is strong
Tho’ it may not be for long,
We’ll hold on to it
We might as well hold the bat
Till they knock us flat
Our dignity of race may
Retire into its shell
Our Minister of Grace may
Defend us none too well
But still if a child
Becomes too wild
And we’re forced to use the rod,
Thank God
For the Stately Homes of England

 

Tuesday 24 January 2012

Henry James

Filed under: people,writing - the tops — Tags: , — Peter Monro @ 2:46 am

 

 

from the Master by Colm Toibin, about Henry James, wonderful writing.

Henry returned to his parents’ house in Boston. He could not have had the silence of the house to himself, with only his Aunt Kate, whom he loved, for company. He could not have slept in his father’s bed, feeling it his duty somehow to do so, nor come to possess the house in all its aura of absence, waiting to be filled with as open a heart as he did now that William (his brother) was so far away.

About a week after his father was buried, a letter came in William’s hand addressed to Henry James. Since Henry was awaiting news of William, it did not occur to him that the letter had been written to his father and that he should not open it. He had read the first paragraph before he realized his mistake, even though, as he subsequently noticed, the  letter had begun ‘Dear Father’. He held the letter for several days, telling no one about it, and then on a Sunday morning, the last day of the year, when it was quiet, the snow deep and the light scarce, he made his way to the cemetery where his parents lay close together. He was alone and he made sure as he approached the grave that no one was watching him.

He hoped that his presence now might help his parents to feel the great ease he wished for them, to know how grateful he was to them and how raw with sadness he remained at their departure from the earth. He took William’s letter out of his pocket and in a voice clear and audible he began to read it to the old ghost for whom it had been intended. But gradually, as the tears came, he reduced his voice to a whisper and several times he had to stop and put his hand over his face as these words, meant so tenderly, moved him more than any of his own words, or any words about his father he had heard since he arrived. He forced himself to continue.

“As for the other side, and Mother, and all our possible meeting I can’t say anything. More than ever at this moment do I feel that if that were true, all would be solved and justified. And it comes strongly over me in bidding you good-bye how life is but a day and expresses mainly but a single note. It is so much like the art of bidding an ordinary good-night. Good night my sacred old Father !  If I don’t see you again – Farewell ! A blessed farewell !”

Somewhere in the depths of the cold earth, Henry felt, his father’s spirit lingered, enough for Henry to long for the letter to last, so  that he would not have to walk away in silence, leaving his parents in a place he now viewed as the most sacred and forgiving. He hated the barreness of the winter season and the sounds of his own footsteps on the ice as he moved away.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Saturday 21 January 2012

Tom Stoppard

Filed under: interview,people,theatre — Tags: , , , , — Peter Monro @ 4:45 pm

 


These notes are part of a lesson on ‘playwrights  and the theatre’.

Curly-headed Tom is in New York in 1997 for his  trilogy ‘the Coast of Utopia’ which consists of three plays – “Voyage”, “Shipwreck”, and “Salvage”. 9 hours long, it is about Russian intellectuals – Herzen, Bakunin, Turgenev, Balinsky – and their philosophical debates in pre-revolutionary Russia between 1833 and 1866.

He talks to Charlie Rose http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/16

One of my great regrets in life is Isaiah Berlin is not here to read it.

Isaiah B saw the impossibility of a society which satisfied every ideal or philosophical wish list; he knew that everything has to give way to something else, otherwise you’re trying to square a circle. You can’t have absolute liberty or absolute equality, or  absolute justice.

“I try to write the plays I’d like to see; let me amend that, at the risk of being too  tautological. I try to write the plays I’d like to have written.” – very TS.

“the Oprah of the  intelligencia”, more than 25 plays and dazzling language.

the art of the playwright – “it’s to do with the control of information from the stage to the audience.

in the end, the art of it is to tell the audience, so much and no more, at this moment and at no other, in the following order and not in a different order,

the theatre of text transmuted into event.   the playwright doles, dribbles out information.”

he took out Herzen’s line – ‘he incubated the germ for a colossal activity for which there is no demand’.

Bakunin rushed all over Europe, as though he had a rocket attached to his trousers.

TS gives the most brilliant exposition of Russians and Russia at the end of 19th century, which consisted of serfs, a tiny aristocracy that owned it all, and little else. So the thinkers rushed off to Paris where everything wonderful lay, for the answers and enlightenment. Then they found they weren’t there, so decided it was their go to make the perfect society and avoid the mistakes the Europeans had made.  It is bravura talking.

as to his legacy, posterity – in the words of Lytton Strachey ‘what has posterity ever done for me ?’ there are so many examples of work which is relevant to its time and nothing else.

 

 

Thursday 19 January 2012

Sir Reg’s wind farms

Filed under: green — Tags: , — Peter Monro @ 4:36 pm

 Sir Reginald Sheffield, bt, listens tolerantly as a delegation of peasants comes to thank him for spoiling their view

James Delingpoole apologises to Sir Reginald Sheffield, Bt. distinguished father-in-law of the Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, no less -  for saying he was making nearly £1,000 a week from the wind turbines on his estates.

The correct figure is, of course, nearly £1,000 a day.

There are eight 400 foot wind turbines now enhancing the view for miles around on his 3,000 acre Normanby Hall estate, near Scunthorpe.

While a sentimental fool, the Duke of Northumberland, persists in resisting the wheelbarrows-full of cash being offered by developers to build wind farms on his estates for the following reasons:

“I have come to the personal conclusion that wind farms divide communities, ruin landscapes, affect tourism, make a minimal contribution to our energy needs and a negligible contribution towards reducing CO2 emissions.”

Such antiquated notions as caring for the people who live in and around your estates or preserving the beauty of the landscape for future generations, have no place in the forward looking, post-carbon world

After all, if a government run by one’s son in law (did we mention this already: that Sir Reginald Sheffield’s daughter Sam is married to the current British Prime Minister, who has promised to lead the “greenest government ever” ?) decides that it is in the national interest to destroy the British landscape, double the price of electricity and transfer money via renewable energy boondoggles from the pockets of taxpayers into the swollen coffers of rich, landowning baronets worth £20 million plus, then what’s a poor fellow to do other than say: “Yes please,  you frightful, oiky wind-farm developing fellow. If you wouldn’t mind leaving that wheelbarrow of notes there. And that one there. That will be all, thank you. Now get orrff my land.”

 

Wednesday 18 January 2012

Debo on Paddy & her sisters

Filed under: interview,Paddy,people,writing - the tops — Tags: , — Peter Monro @ 11:50 am

the Frick collection  interview with Debo Duchess of Devonshire  http://www.frick.org/video/

while you’re at it, look at the Frick website, because it has some of the most beautiful things in the world.  click on ‘collection’ to see the ‘works on display’ – they go on for 49 pages.

Marsie Frick came to stay with us years ago in the north of Scotland. Fife, her husband took us out to the local restaurant, and started by ordering a smart cocktail, which left the waiter up the creek, he’d never heard of it, let alone knew how to make one.

 

 

This interview was done by Heywood Hill, the bookshop in Curzon Street. Debo’s sister Nancy worked there during the war

‘Dear Heywood,

I hear Mollie is leaving at the end of next week, in which case so am I.

Yours ever,

Nancy.’

She was still there a year later, and after 75 years Heywood is still as a bookshop should be – a haven of civilisation.


In Tearing Haste
is Debo’s latest book of letters and is a  record of the friendship, between Deborah, Dowager Duchess of Devonshire and the celebrated travel writer Sir Patrick Leigh Fermor DSO.

HH: Charlotte (Mosley, her niece and editor), could you set the scene for the book  ?

CM: The letters cover some 50 years. They are light-hearted and extremely funny. There are descriptions of Paddy filming Ill Met By Moonlight with Dirk Bogarde and Debo going to stay with the Queen at Sandringham. Paddy writes beautifully and Debo hits the nail on the head again and again. Paddy first met Debo in 1940 at a ball and he describes the vision of her and Andrew [later 11th Duke of Devonshire] dancing, wrapped in each other. The friendship really took off when Paddy first stayed at Lismore Castle [the Devonshires’ Irish home] in 1956.

HH: Debo, what do you remember of Paddy from that time ?

DD: His reputation was terrific because of his extraordinary feat in the war in capturing the German commander on Crete [General Heinrich Kriepe]. Paddy was a byword for courage and cleverness and everything. I was terribly intrigued to meet him. He didn’t fit any category I had ever come across and still doesn’t. He’s a mixture between a scholar and a nomad, and heaps of other things.

HH: Does Paddy ever talk about his war ?

DD: One of his great traits is his extreme modesty. But luckily Billy Moss wrote the book Ill Met By Moonlight, otherwise most people wouldn’t have heard of his exploits. But there it all is set out in black and white, just how it was.

HH: When he came to Lismore he was obviously much taken with the place. Did you spend a lot of time there in those years ?

DD: Yes. It was like a sort of fairy story: the fantastic charm of the Irish and the fact that there was no rationing for ten years before it finished in England. The place itself is so incredibly romantic.

HH: Paddy seems attracted to romantic and strange places. Was England after the war a little dull for him ?

DD: Nobody had the spirit really to do very much. For Paddy it must have seemed very quiet and boring. But he always found unusual places, like Chagford in Devon. His description of going hunting there is wonderful.

HH: How formative was his famous walk across Europe ?

DD: Oh totally. Not only the walk, the things he saw and the languages he learnt but the fact that he fell in love with somebody in Romania and just stayed there for two years. That must have been like another dream. He’s a free spirit.

HH: Did you ever travel together ?

DD: We had a marvellous trip to Andalusia. It was Whitsun and there was a tremendous parade where all the villages carried the Virgin Mary statue to the church and they fought for the chance to carry it. There was no room at the pub and Paddy and I slept on the stone floor of a shed, in the company of nine gardeners. I have never forgotten it because he snored something awful. We were sleeping head to toe and to try and stop him I started tweaking his toes but that made no difference. So I went past his ankles up to his knees, and higher and higher up before there was any reaction of any sort! It was on that trip that I saw how tough Paddy was. He didn’t notice heat or cold and that must have been a tremendous asset in Crete.

HH: What do his letters mean to you ?

DD: I always love getting letters but Paddy’s are absolute jewels compared to most, so they continue to mean a great great deal. It is a sort of ding dong between us, as it was with my sisters.

HH: Does he like the fact that you claim not to have read his book ?

DD: It makes him laugh somehow. There they all are sitting beside my bed, beautifully inscribed, and he says, ‘Look here, honestly it’s awfully good, it’s frightfully good’, and I say, ‘Alright Pad’. I will have to try one day.

HH: Did his reputation as a writer develop gradually ?

CM: He was immediately recognised as an exceptional writer but I don’t think his books were widely read until A Time of Gifts in 1977.

DD: That was the winner of all time. He’s a very meticulous writer. He goes back and back over things, which makes it quite hard to read his manuscripts because bits are crossed out, another set of words put in, those are crossed out and then there’s a star saying that didn’t really mean this. Jock Murray, his old publisher, used to go sideways to the table when all this mass of stuff arrived written by hand. He put his head one way and then the other and somehow got a little bit of the gist of what Paddy was trying to say.

HH: Is Paddy a social person ?

DD: Very. But now he’s older I think he gets a bit fed up by people who just turn up because he’s so famous. In Greece he is a kind of king because of his exploits in the war.

HH: What was his wife Joan like ?

DD: Oh wonderful. She was beautiful, clever and very private. A very good chess player and a total intellectual. She kept heaps of cats. She never wrote anything as far as I know but she read everything. She was Paddy’s chief correspondent on those climbing expeditions which were published as Three Letters from the Andes.

HH: Does Paddy like other writers ?

DD: Yes. He was great friends for instance with Bruce Chatwin, and Maurice Bowra and Cyril Connolly. Evelyn was a bit before.

HH: You and your sisters had known Waugh very well.

DD: My sister Diana [Mosley] was the one he loved. He adored her. And Nancy [Mitford] too, but he was sort of in love with Diana I think. I inherited him a bit from them and I did love him very much until he got impossible with drink. I loved his funniness and his company. He was somehow touching because he obviously longed to be something he never could be – a tall thin cavalry officer. He probably didn’t appreciate his own genius. Not easy.

HH: Did Nancy know Paddy ?

DD: Yes, they were great friends. Nancy had a very strong governessy side. She could hardly bear some of the things that went on, like just forgetting lunch. Whatever he suggested I rather thought it would be fun to do and Nancy used to say, ‘Don’t pander to him!’ Paddy was a chain smoker and he always rather liked a refreshing drink or two. So by the time he got to bed with a lit cigarette it was an absolute miracle that nothing happened.

HH: Do you remember Nancy working at Heywood Hil ?

DD: Very well. Heywood was very quiet and the sort of person who sold a book from behind his back. He was at the war anyway which was why she was there. Anyone on leave with whom she had the slightest acquaintance would go straight there. It was the best fun in the world. She earned £3 a week and lived in Maida Vale and often walked home to save the bus fare. She was on her beam-ends because her husband was a spendthrift and used to come back simply to borrow money off her. Once in the bus queue in the blackout in Park Lane she was hugged by a huge black American soldier and she said, ‘Go away, I’m 40 !’

HH: You and Andrew maintained your connection with Heywood Hill.

DD: I have alwaysloved the feel of it and the people who work there, seeing what they have out and what’s going well and all that. But I am honestly not a reader. Andrew loved its intimacy. He used to sometimes buy 10 of a book and put them in each bedroom of Chatsworth. He was a real bookworm and was never without a book in his hands until he went blind, which was all the crueller for him. Nothing took its place.

HH: Have you enjoyed working with Charlotte ?

DD: Oh she’s a tremendous friend. She’s had such praise for the books she’s edited and no wonder. For the Mitford book she chose 600 out of 12,000 letters. I don’t think anybody else could have done it. She’s quite extraordinary.

 

HH: Were you surprised by the success of The Mitfords ?

DD: Not entirely, because having been Nancy’s literary executor I realise what a lot of fans she has. Her novels were written nearly 70 years ago but they still live. They’re sort of classics it seems – all in print. I expected it might be a success but only because of my sisters and the wonderful way they wrote.

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 17 January 2012

Louis MacNeice

Filed under: poetry — Tags: — Peter Monro @ 1:59 pm

Louis MacNeice, outstanding poet from the thirties through the fifties; he died at 55 in 1963. Irish, he lived
in England, was a lecturer, worked for the BBC, liked fast cars, women and too much drink.

Bagpipe Music

 It’s no go the merry-go-round, it’s no go the rickshaw,
All we want is a limousine and a ticket for the peepshow.
Their knickers are made of crêpe-de-chine, their shoes are made of python,
Their halls are lined with tiger rugs and their walls with heads of bison.

John MacDonald found a corpse, put it under the sofa,
Waited till it came to life and hit it with a poker,
Sold its eyes for souvenirs, sold its blood for whiskey,
Kept its bones for dumb-bells to use when he was fifty.

It’s no go the Yogi-Man, it’s no go Blavatsky,
All we want is a bank balance and a bit of skirt in a taxi.

Annie MacDougall went to milk, caught her foot in the heather,
Woke to hear a dance record playing of Old Vienna.
It’s no go your maidenheads, it’s no go your culture,
All we want is a Dunlop tyre and the devil mend the puncture.

The Laird o’ Phelps spent Hogmanay declaring he was sober,
Counted his feet to prove the fact and found he had one foot over.
Mrs Carmichael had her fifth, looked at the job with repulsion,
Said to the midwife ‘Take it away; I’m through with overproduction’.

It’s no go the gossip column, it’s no go the Ceilidh,
All we want is a mother’s help and a sugar-stick for the baby.

 Willie Murray cut his thumb, couldn’t count the damage,
Took the hide of an Ayrshire cow and used it for a bandage.
His brother caught three hundred cran when the seas were lavish,
Threw the bleeders back in the sea and went upon the parish.

It’s no go the Herring Board, it’s no go the Bible,
All we want is a packet of fags when our hands are idle.
It’s no go the picture palace, it’s no go the stadium,
It’s no go the country cot with a pot of pink geraniums,
It’s no go the Government grants, it’s no go the elections,
Sit on your arse for fifty years and hang your hat on a pension.

It’s no go my honey love, it’s no go my poppet;
Work your hands from day to day, the winds will blow the profit.
The glass is falling hour by hour, the glass will fall for ever,
But if you break the bloody glass you won’t hold up the weather.

Here he recites it  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n72XebBaMeI

Kipling

Filed under: international relations,poetry — Tags: — Peter Monro @ 7:25 am

Here is the poem referred to by Simon Jenkins in his damning view of British foreign policy.

Kipling wrote it in 1919 when he was 53, with a pen dipped in acid and bitter disillusion, after the carnage of WWI. He had lost his only, dearly loved son in the war and a precious daughter some years earlier.  He was a drained man and England a drained nation.

His message was harsh to those who hoped human nature could be changed for the better, that lasting peace was possible, and that bills would never come due.

“The copybook headings were proverbs or maxims printed at the top of 19th century British schoolboys’ notebook pages. The students had to write them by hand repeatedly down the page.”

The poem refers to the wisdom of these proverbs and maxims, which we ignore at our peril. The enduring nature of those old wise sayings, and the morals they instill remain constant when all trends and fads of thinking have faltered. It says that old wisdom is still wise and true even if we have lost faith in it, and the last line echoes the toll of the first two years of the Russian Revolution

It was a clinging to old-fashioned common sense by a man and a world deeply in need of something to cling to.

 


the Gods of the Copybook Headings

As I pass through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.

We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.

We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.

With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.

When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “Stick to the Devil you know.”

On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “The Wages of Sin is Death.”

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “If you don’t work you die.”

Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fir
e;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return !

 

 

 

Monday 16 January 2012

Foreign policy

Filed under: international relations — Tags: , , , — Peter Monro @ 12:45 pm

Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston said in 1848:

“We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.”

His maiden speech in Feb 1808 was on the necessity of ordering the Navy to bombard Copenhagen to stop Napoleon seizing the Danish fleet. For two decades, “Pam” was at the centre of foreign affairs not only in Europe but also in Turkey, Afghanistan, the Middle East and Asia. He waged the Opium War with China, resulting in the delivery of Hong Kong as a trading base to Britain in 1842.

Highly patriotic, Palmerston did not shirk from threatening the use of force in the national interest. Queen Victoria detested him, he had attempted to seduce one of her ladies in waiting, Lady Dacre, entering her bedroom while staying as Victoria’s guest at Windsor Castle.

Of a particularly intractable problem relating to Schleswig-Holstein, he said that only three people had ever understood it: one was Prince Albert, who was dead; the second was a German professor, who had gone insane; and the third was himself, who had forgotten it.

He died in office in 1865 aged 80. His last words, apparently, were ‘Die, my dear Doctor, that is the last thing I shall do’.

 

A more recent and damning view of our foreign policy today and these last 50 years is given by Simon Jenkins.

None of our forays into foreign countries have anything to do with Britain, let alone being within Britain’s sovereign domain, nor have they been for over half a century. The power has gone. The legitimacy has departed. Only the language of implied command echoes through the Foreign Office’s post-imperial dusk.  That echo is far from an irrelevance. It has conditioned surely the most catastrophic decade in British foreign policy since the 1930s.

Over this last decade Britain’s national sovereignty has not been remotely threatened by any other state, yet its government has adopted a stance of hectoring and often open belligerence towards much of the Muslim world. British forces have been sent to ill-judged and ineptly fought wars that have left British cities in a state of perpetual terrorist alert. It is hard to think of any gain to Britain’s foreign interests that has come from these wars.

The suspicion lurks that the obsession of so many Britons with past violence (two World wars) and present cruelty is no longer deterring them from risking its repetition, but the opposite. It makes them ready, almost eager, for more.

Those who argue against unnecessary war are routinely asked the father’s knee question, “So what would you do ?” Taught since 1939 that Britain must be seen to do something, the British are programmed to meddle. There have been occasions in the last 50 years when it has been right to declare hostilities against other nations – the Falklands, Kosovo and the first Iraq war. But usually the answer to “what to do” about foreign regimes of which we disapprove is, quite simply, to do nothing.

For the most part, other nations’ business is not ours. In the last 25 years Britain has mostly been useless at putting the world to rights – it has struggled to wrap itself in the tattered flag of empire, at vast expense but to little effect. It would have been better, far better, to maintain good relations with other states in the hope of assisting causes we profess to hold dear. As for rattling a sabre whenever Washington says so, that is the most humiliating idiocy.

‘The dog returns to its vomit, and the sow returns to her mire/ And the burnt fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the fire.” Kipling was right.

Britain is out of Iraq and desperate to get out of Afghanistan. So why gird ourselves for a fight with Iran, a proud country of 75 million people with whom we cannot go to war without taking leave of our senses ?

 

As they say in the exam papers – discuss.   ‘To do or not to do’.

 

Sunday 15 January 2012

Tinpot toad law

Filed under: the law — Tags: , — Peter Monro @ 10:51 am

Mark Steyn shows that presumption of innocence is not all it could be in – the Matto Gross, Yemen, Chechnya ? – er no, New York.

In Lord Binhgam’s ‘Rule of Law’ with its eight conditions for the law to work, no 7 said “public officials should not abuse their power.”  But the city of glass canyons doesn’t need any of that stuff, it’s got – Bloomberg’s Law.

 

One of the most disturbing features of the US justice system is its ever more grotesque loss of proportion, at the federal level and in far too many states and municipalities. Take the case of Meredith Graves, the Tennessee nurse who, upon visiting the9/11 memorial in New York and seeing the signs forbidding firearms, asked the staff if she could check her pistol (lawful and licensed in her home state).

She was handcuffed, arrested, and now faces three and a half years in jail for firearms possession – for the crime of being unaware that the Second Amendment does not apply in New York City.

Asked about the case, New York’s thuggish mayor decided to add insult to injury:

“Let’s assume that she didn’t get arrested for carrying a gun. She probably would have gotten arrested for the cocaine that was in her pocket.”

There was no cocaine. The white stuff in her pocket was analyzed by Bloomberg’s cops and found to be, as the nurse had said it was, aspirin powder. So this loathsome slug of a man has slandered an ordinary American citizen on tape in front of the world. Why ? Because he can.

As Kevin Williamson wrote:

“You can be confident that Meredith Graves will be locked up, because it is far easier to lock up law-abiding types such as Meredith Graves than it is to police the criminals who actually do the murders and muggings. This isn’t a question of whether the government’s behavior is constitutional or unconstitutional, but of whether the government’s behavior constitutes government, of whether it makes any sense at all, and of whether government can establish elementary priorities and exercise elementary discretion.”

Anyone with any knowledge of New York City’s standard operating procedure could have guessed the answer to that. But we might have known that Bloomberg would effortlessly sink to new depths. It is outrageous that his enforcers are obtuse enough to seek jail time for Meredith Graves. But it is entirely unacceptable for the chief executive of a major American jurisdiction to slur innocent private citizens as coke snorters simply because he’s in power and they’re not. I hope Mrs Graves sues the pants off this tinpot toad.

 

 

 

Friday 13 January 2012

John Hurt

Filed under: film,interview,theatre — Tags: , — Peter Monro @ 5:33 pm

taken from actors & acting 


The superb Charlie Rose talks to John Hurt http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12035  who is in new York in ‘Krapp’s Last Tape’ by Sam Beckett, in which he shares the stage with a tape machine which plays his own voice of thirty years before back to him.

JH even looks like the old eagle Sam Beckett now; of the Elephant Man – ‘a representation of that which is misunderstood in all of us’;

actors forever being asked ‘how they do it’, the same doesn’t happen to a singer or golfer or painter. it’s assumed they just can;

Olivier after ecstatic applause of his magnificent Othello, sits enraged in dressing room. When told  what a triumph his performance has been, replied – Yes, I know but how did I do it ?

to perform beyond what you can, is that inspiration ?

will he write his memoirs ?  wait till he’s 90; the murk of memory; Geoffrey Bernard asked to do his, said wld be happy to, and if there was anyone who could tell him what happened from 1967 to 1980, he appreciate hearing from them.

he did Tinker Tailor with Gary Oldman; the first Hamlet JH saw – ‘nothing will be better than the first one’  - was with Richard Burton & Claire Bloom !!!  RB had the most beautiful English-speaking voice in the last 100 years; JH  filmed ’1984′ with him.

JH is superb mimic. Shakespeare – he doesn’t like the way it’s spoken at Stratford, too iambic; his favourite soliloqy (that he knows) – is Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll, which he’d take to a desert island. And he recites it – superbly.

 

`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

“Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!”

 He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought –
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.

And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!

One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.

“And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!’
He chortled in his joy.

`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

 

 

 

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Peter Monro - The Private English Tutor

WebCAL