?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Second paragraph of third section:
Dann had wanted to leave the Centre - leave the past - because of the weight of sorrow on him, which he believed he understood. It was natural. Of course he was bereft, but he would get over it. He had no intention of subsiding into unhappiness. No, when he got walking, really moving, he would be better. But he had not got into his stride, his rhythm: it was what he needed, the effortlessness of it, when legs and body were in the swing of the moment, a time different from what ruled ordinary sitting, lying, moving about - never tiring. A drug it was, he supposed, to walk like that, walking at its best, as he had done sometimes with Mara, when they were into their stride.
I hadn't realised while reading that this was a sequel to a book I haven't read, Mara and Dann, so was judging it more on its own merits. (People who have read Mara and Dann generally seem to think that it was better.)

The setting is a post-apocalyptic world where Europe is covered by melting ice sheets, the Mediterranean has dried up but slowly starting to fill again, and the remnants of humanity are trying to hold onto and maybe rebuild civilisation. Dann is thrust into a leadership role despite his bad health, and, surrounded by his companions of the title, is drawn into a quest to save a library of knowledge from the old days. The prose is terse, but the setting and the characters conveyed effectively, Dann's personal drama very closely linked to the question of what will happen to the cultural heritage now under threat from the changing climate. It's also fairly short. You can get it here.

This was the top unread book on my shelves acquired in 2011. Next on that list is The God Instinct: The Psychology of Souls, Destiny and the Meaning of Life by Jesse Bering.

My tweets

Read more...Collapse )

The Tree of Life, by Mark Michalowski

Second paragraph of third chapter:
She pulled a pained face at Piotr, standing to her right. He gave a tiny shrug, used to the heat, Benny imagined. She wasn't quite sure how he'd wangled being out here with her on her first 'walkabout', but it was (only vaguely) reassuring to have a familiar face there.
I rather dropped off my blogging of Who-related books last year, but I intend to fix that this year. As I work through them, this is the next in publication order of the Bernice Summerfield books by Big Finish, in this case a novel by Mark Michalowski. The setup is the rather usual framing narrative of Benny getting summoned to a planet on which there are funny things going on, ending up with everyone trapped in a base under siege, but I thought there were a couple of very good wrinkles to it, in particular the biological cycle of the alien tree/giant hamster symbiotes which are responsible for the trouble, and the internal politics of both aliens and humans which make a bad situation worse. Also mercifully short. Worth a look.

Next in this sequence is Parallel Lives, a collection of three novellas, the first by my old friend Rebecca Levene, and the other two by Stewart Sheargold and Dave Stone.

My tweets

Monday reading

Current
Who Is The Doctor, by Graeme Burk and Robert Smith?
He, She and It, by Marge Piercy
The Universe Between, by Alan E Nourse

Last books finished
Woman on the Edge of Time, by Marge Piercy
A Tangle Of Fates, by Leslie Ann Moore
Gone With The Wind, by Margaret Mitchell

Next books
Toast, by Charles Stross
Planesrunner by Ian McDonald
Parallel Lives, by Rebecca Levene, Stewart Sheargold and Dave Stone

My tweets

Tags:

The Berlin wall was erected on 13 August 1961. It was breached on 9 November 1989, after 28 years, 2 months and 27 days (10315 days, to be exact). Counting forward another 28 years, 2 months and 27 days (or just 10315 days, you get the same answer) takes us to tomorrow, 5 February 2018.

Below is the blog entry I posted on the twentieth anniversary of the Fall of the Wall, in 2009. Since then, I have continued to enjoy visiting Berlin; and I always pay my respects to the Wall and its memories, for me and for many others.

Originally posted by nwhyte at The Fall of the Wall, twenty years on

My tweets

Gone With The Wind

Gone With The Wind won the Academy Award for Outstanding Production of 1939; for once, I have actually seen two of the other Best Picture nominees, Ninotchka and of course The Wizard of Oz. It won another seven competitive Oscars and two honorary ones, a sweep that was not exceeded for decades. I have actually seen two other 1939 films, which makes this by far my best year up to now - back in the early 1980s the BBC showed the Basil Rathbone The Hound of the Baskervilles and the less memorable The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes.

IMDB has this at the top of its 1939 list on one system, The Wizard of Oz winning on the other. Adjusted for inflation, Gone With the Wind is the top-grossing film of all time (narrowly ahead of the original Star Wars), and also apparently holds the record for cinema tickets sold in (at least) both the USA and the UK. (I can’t find figures for Ireland. Incidentally, the first ever cinema in Ireland was owned and operated by James Joyce, subsequently better known for other things.) Here's a trailer.



I’m going to note here a couple of actors who are back again from other recent Oscar winners. I’ll get to Clark Gable later, but here’s Eddie Robinson as Scarlett’s aunt’s enslaved coachman, having been Rheba’s boyfriend Donald in last year’s You Can’t Take It With You. They have tried to age him up, not with total success.

And here’s Henry Davenport as Dr Meade, having been the night judge in You Can’t Take It With You and also the Chief of Staff of the French army in The Life of Émile Zola. I don’t know if there are other actors who managed to be in the Best Picture winner in three or more successive years; I’ll keep counting.
9925180B-7F83-4B1E-AD2D-142ABFCC3833.jpeg

To get the most important bit out of the way: Gone With The Wind is racist and gives a positive account of slavery. This is made absolutely clear with the film’s opening statement.
9925180B-7F83-4B1E-AD2D-142ABFCC3833.jpeg
9A97654E-937C-42A2-A94E-F519B4DF9D34.jpeg
2C1414D8-2F68-4458-BCE9-77CAA47FF3CF.jpeg

The war is entirely portrayed as a struggle to preserve a whole romantic and chivalrous way of life, which is doomed because of its failure to invest in its own defence. Both Rhett Butler and Ashley Wilkes spot early on that the war will be lost; nobody ever states out loud that the reason for the war was slavery. All the Northerners are bad guys. All the black characters are happy in their relationship with their white masters. Most of them are disarmingly stupid (a particular shout to Butterfly McQueen, who must have been gritting her teeth as she delivered Prissy’s lines).

Apparently the NAACP were consulted on the script, and advised against the use of the word “darkie” instead of “nigger” and that the Ku Klux Klan should not be explicitly referenced (as they are in the book), so it could have been even worse. And also on the plus side, Hattie McDaniel was the first ever black actor to win an Oscar for her performance as Mammy, though she was of course excluded from the film’s launch in Atlanta and the role itself is not exactly liberating.
9925180B-7F83-4B1E-AD2D-142ABFCC3833.jpeg

(Incidentally, Barbara O’Neil plays Scarlett’s mother despite being only three years older than Vivian Leigh.)

The second worst thing about the film is that it is simply too long. The book was of course hugely popular, and its many fans would have wanted servicing. Six of the twelve early Oscar-winners I have seen so far were based on books and another on a short story (two of the other five were adapted from stage plays, the remaining three were original material). Gone With The Wind deviates least from the printed original, and is the poorer for it. Its very length was part of the reason for its fame, of course, but it could easily have lost an hour and been better. The first half has a tremendous impetus as the Old South disintegrates, but once the war is over, the narrative thrust has gone, and we slip into a series of somewhat disconnected episodes from post-war life, ending with Rhett’s dramatic rejection (which one can anticipate from his very first scene). I think the last scene misses the target; surely Rhett has made the right decision, to leave Scarlett, and her fantasy that she can get him back (after their atrocious behaviour to each other during the marriage) is indulged a little too much.

The incidental music is great, but again just a little too much - I watched the full version with overture, intermission and end music, and actually the overture is a bit of a disappointment as overtures go.

Like Cimarron, we have the interesting case of a text that is racist but also somewhat feminist. A lot of this is tied up in the character arc of Scarlett and her three marriages. She starts the film as a very silly teenager, with an appalling crush on poor Ashley, who marries someone else on a whim (and is quickly widowed). But at the halfway mark, she transforms herself into a powerful economic operator in her own right, and it is here that she is at her most sympathetic - she depends on her second husband’s money to start her business, but it’s absolutely clear that she is the one making the decisions. Then the arc curves down again when she finally gets together with Rhett and it doesn’t work out; and at the end she is fantasising about his return to a marriage that she herself was never fully committed to. Basically, she does better, and the audience is encouraged to identify with her more, when she is not being hassled by the men who have led her society to war and disaster. Sure, a lot of the other women characters are stereotyped, but most of the men are gallant cardboard cutouts as well. And anyway Scarlett’s story is the story; one of IMDB’s glorious factoids is that Leigh’s 2 hours, 23 minutes and 32 seconds on screen is the longest ever performance to win an Oscar. (She was the second youngest winner of Best Actress at the time, and is still the tenth youngest out of 90.)
9925180B-7F83-4B1E-AD2D-142ABFCC3833.jpeg

And that brings us to the one of the film’s core strengths: the very watchable smouldering chemistry between Vivien Leigh as Scarlett and Clark Gable as Rhett. (Some credit for this also belongs to the script, which was attributed to Sidney Howard who won an Oscar for it; sadly he was killed in a farming accident before shooting even started.) We’ve had Gable twice before, in It Happened One Night and Mutiny on the Bounty, and he was good in both of those, but he is excellent here, as a rogue who rises to the occasion when challenged. Here he has very strong support from Leslie Howard as Ashley and Olivia de Havilland as Melanie.
9925180B-7F83-4B1E-AD2D-142ABFCC3833.jpeg

We should shout out to Olivia de Havilland, who at the age of 101 is the only surviving lead from any Oscar-winning film of the 1930s.

I have a couple of quibbles - Leslie Howard, at 46, is really too old to be Ashley, supposedly one of the neighbourhood kids, not much older than Scarlett (who is explicitly sixteen at the start of the film); he is also way too English, and indeed the white Southern characters generally fail to have very Southern accents. This is the one scene where all four leads appear together, when the women are tending Ashley after Rhett has brought him back from the definitely-not-Ku-Klux-Klan raid.
9925180B-7F83-4B1E-AD2D-142ABFCC3833.jpeg

Finally, the film looks absolutely gorgeous. Of course, it's obviously California rather than Georgia, from the vegetation and the landscape; and Margaret Mitchell objected that Tara was far too elegant; in the book is was "built according to no architectural plan whatever, with extra rooms added where and when it seemed convenient". These are minor quibbles. The landscapes and architecture are beautifully realised but never get in the way of the human story; we go intimate and close, we pull out to look at the bigger picture, and in particular, as conflict loomed on the other side of both oceans, we see the horrors of war. We've had two outright war movies so far (Wings and All Quiet on the Western Front) and one where war was a distant but fatal prospect (Cavalcade); here we don't have a single battle scene, but a stark contrast between the gung-ho young warriors who set off to battle and the (rather few) casualties who return. Rhett's pragmatic rather than patriotic approach turns out to be the right way to go, and Scarlett succeeds when she adopts the same strategy. 

I had not seen this before, and of course I doubt that it will ever be on general cinema release again, but it is just about worth the four hours of my life it took to watch (plus time to write this review).

Next on the list is Alfred Hitchcock's Rebecca, where I have actually read the book, if a long time ago.

(Still reading the book - will report on it in due course.)

My tweets

Tags:

Second paragraph of third chapter:
‘It’s terrifying!’ said Dick.
An attempt to keep the continuity of the updated Famous Five books from last year, this is not so much a one-joke book as a no-joke book, the Famous Five being kept in a jail which resembles an immigration holding centre by the combination of the Secret Seven and evil cousin Rupert. Not really recommended but you can get it here.

My tweets

Rather Be The Devil, by Ian Rankin

Second paragraph of third chapter:
"When did he move out?" Rebus asked.
I admit it; I'm a complete Rebus addict. I had missed that there was a new Rebus novel out, but someone kind got it for me for Christmas. (I prioritised Christmas presents in my reading this month, and actually finished this two weeks ago - my blogging is some way behind my actual reading.)

It's another good one. There is a combination of a dubious next generation criminal leader, with aspirations to become the next great Cafferty, with a cold case from the 1970s which suddenly starts warming up again. There is the micro-geopgraphy of Shandwick Place. There is tension between Rebus himself, pathologist Deborah Quant (his current girlfriend), his former sidekick and now successor Siobhan Clarke, and their competitor /colleague Malcolm Fox. My complaint is that the eastern European bad guy, mixed up in Edinburgh business, doesn't get a lot of page time. But it is all very satisfying; good guys win, bad guys lose. You can get it here.

My tweets

Tags:

January Books

Non-fiction: 3
Nine Gates: Entering the Mind of Poetry, by Jane Hirshfield
Patrick Troughton: The Biography of the Second Doctor Who, by Michael Troughton
Watching the English, by Kate Fox



Fiction (non-sf): 6
L’Équation Africaine, by Yasmina Khadra
War and Turpentine, by Stefan Hermans
Quoth the Raven, by Jane Haddam
Rather Be The Devil, by Ian Rankin
Five Escape Brexit Island, by Bruno Vincent
The Thirteenth Tale, by Diane Setterfield



Theatre: 1
You Can’t Take It With You, by Moss Hart and George S. Kaufman



sf (non-Who): 10
It Can't Happen Here, by Sinclair Lewis
Lincoln in the Bardo, by George Saunders
The Fall of Hyperion, by Dan Simmons
Orlando, by Virginia Woolf
"Gonna Roll the Bones" by Fritz Leiber
An Old Captivity, by Nevil Shute
The Story of General Dann and Mara's Daughter, Griot and the Snow Dog, by Doris Lessing
The Island Of Doctor Moreau, by H. G. Wells
Daystar and Shadow, by James B. Johnson
Woman on the Edge of Time, by Marge Piercy



Doctor Who, etc: 4
Who Killed Kennedy: The Shocking Secret Linking a Time Lord and a President, by “James Stevens” and David Bishop
The Talons of Weng-Chiang, script by Robert Holmes
The Tree of Life, by Mark Michalowski
Doctor Who and the Krikkitmen, by Douglas Adams and James Goss


Comics: 2
Ys de Legende: v 1 Verraad, by Jean-Luc Istin and Dejan Nenadov
Providence, Act 1, by Alan Moore and Jacen Burrows



~7,300 pages
7/26 by women (Hirshfield, Fox, Haddam, Setterfield, Woolf, Lessing, Piercy)
1/26 by PoC (Khadra)
2/26 reread (The Fall of Hyperion, Who Killed Kennedy)

Reading now
Gone with the Wind, by Margaret Mitchell
A Tangle Of Fates, by Leslie Ann Moore

Coming soon (perhaps):
He, She and It, by Marge Piercy
The Universe Between, by Alan E Nourse
Toast, by Charles Stross
Planesrunner by Ian McDonald
Hoger dan de bergen en dieper dan de zee: kroniek van een migrant, by Laïla Koubaa
"Time Considered as a Helix of Semi-Precious Stones", by Samuel R. Delany
Seventeen Equations that Changed the World, by Ian Stewart
Gulliver's Travels, by Jonathan Swift
So, Anyway..., by John Cleese
Dark Matter, by Blake Crouch
Politically Correct Bedtime Stories, by James Finn Garner
Julian, by Gore Vidal
Free Radical, by Vince Cable
Contes Fantastiques Complets, by Guy de Maupassant
The God Instinct by Jesse Bering
The Bean Trees by Barbara Kingsolver
Robot Visions by Isaac Asimov
Wit, Wisdom and Timey Wimey Stuff - The Quotable Doctor Who by Cavan Scott
Doctor Who Storybook 2009 by Keith Temple
Parallel Lives, by Rebecca Levene, Stewart Sheargold and Dave Stone
Torchwood: Rift War by Ian Edgington

My tweets

Tags:

Doctor Who: The Early Adventures, Season 1

Getting back to the Big Finish plays I have bought but not written up, here are four First Doctor stories featuring the surviving original companion actors, released back in 2014. All but one of these is directed by Ken Bentley.

Domain of the Voord, by Andrew Smith



I think the only previous attempt to bring back the Voord (from The Keys of Marinus) was a story in the 1966 Doctor Who Annual. (Apparently they have returned again since 2014, in both comics and audio; and there are references to them being pitted against Irish Wildthyme in the Death Zone on Gallifrey.) Here Andrew Smith has provided them with a rather good and interesting background and origin story, which goes some way to explaining their need to invade. There's a great soundscape depicting the unlucky planet that is the subject of their intentions, and William Russell and Carole Ann Ford give Ian and Susan the full welly (and also sub for Hartnell and Hill). However I found the plot in the end a bit creaky - in particular, the absence and then the return of the Doctor and Barbara was a bit handwavy. Fan opinion seems sharply divided on this one: I thought it was decent but not excellent.

The Doctor's Tale, by Marc Platt



Now it's William Russell and Maureen O’Brien, in a pure historical story of the Crusaders type, visiting the little-known interregnum between the reigns of Richard II and Henry IV in 1400. Alice Haig is very endearing as Richard's very young queen, Isabella, and Gareth Armstrong gets to be Chaucer. But I felt the script came down too heavy on the religion and politics of the day, basically endorsing the Lollards as the good guys and the Church (embodied by John Banks as Bishop Arundel) as the baddies. In my home town, kids still get beaten up for being perceived to be on the wrong side of that argument.

The Bounty of Ceres, by Ian Potter (directed by Lisa Bowerman)



Apparently the first time Peter Purves and Maureen O'Sullivan have worked together since they were on TV! I rather liked this base-under-siege story, with what appears to be a clumsy removal of the Doctor from the story actually turning out to work rather well in plot terms. There's some fun continuity in that the story is set in our future but in the past for both Steven and Vicki. Julia Hills puts in a good commander, Richard Hope is an intriguingly demented Scottish scientist, and the soundscape again is well done.

An Ordinary Life, by Matt Fitton



This was my favourite of the four. Peter Purves and Jean Marsh reprise Steven and Sara, maroon in London in the 1950s (distant past for both) where they are taken in by a family of recently arrived Jamaican immigrants (played by Ram John Holder, Sara Powell and Damian Lynch). But they are not the only recent arrivals to worry about, and the bleak and constrained docklands become the place of conflict among humans and between humans and something else. Holder's total confidence is particularly engaging.

So, in general thumbs up, with reservations about the politics of the second of these.

My tweets

Monday reading

Current
Woman on the Edge of Time, by Marge Piercy
A Tangle Of Fates, by Leslie Ann Moore
Gone With The Wind, by Margaret Mitchell

Last books finished
Doctor Who and the Krikkitmen, by Douglas Adams and James Goss

Next books
He, She and It, by Marge Piercy
The Universe Between, by Alan E Nourse
Toast, by Charles Stross

My tweets

Tags:

Quoth the Raven, by Jane Haddam

Second paragraph of third chapter:
Now she looked down at the piles of pink message slips spread out across her desk and sighed. Back then, it had never occurred to her to do the obvious and apply for admission. Half a dozen students in her own high-school graduating class had been taken on as commuters, all tuition paid by the Crockett Memorial Valley Scholarship Fund. Maybe it was the fact that those students had all been from the other side of town, where houses were neat and conscientiously painted and fathers were present and meticulously sober, that had made her believe, unconsciously, that she was not qualified to be among them. Maybe it was just that, in that time and in that place, "secretary" was the job most women were taught to aspire to. Either that, or "teacher." Miss Maryanne Veer had never suffered from the delusion that she had the talent to be a teacher.
I've tried two other books in this series of murder mysteries featuring retired Armenian-American FBI agent Gregor Demarkian, and neither quite gelled for me, but I must say this worked very well - a campus mystery, where the traditionally low stakes of academic politics have escalated to murder. The mystery is carefully laid out and worked through. I did raise an eyebrow at the sexual politics of the student lifestyle, which seemed to me closer to the 1950s than the 1990s when the book is set, but perhaps I don't know enough about Pennsylvania. Anyway, the best Haddam I've read so far; try it if you like.

This was the non genre fiction book which had lingered longest on my shelves. Next on that list is Baptism in Blood, by the same author, but I'm going to hold off on reviewing it until I have finished all the books I acquired in 2010.

My tweets

Some time this year, Irish voters will have a chance to repeal Article 40.3.3° of the Irish Constitution, inserted by referendum in 1983. It reads:
The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.
This embedded a ban on abortion into the Irish constitution. Many on both sides of the debate, including the Catholic Church, assert that this ban is in line with traditional Christian teaching, particularly in Ireland. The word “medieval” is sometimes used on the pro-choice side.

This is very unfair to the medieval Irish.

A brilliant 2012 article by Maeve Callan of Simpson College, Indiana, “Of Vanishing Fetuses and Maidens Made-Again: Abortion, Restored Virginity, and Similar Scenarios in Medieval Irish Hagiography and Penitentials.” (Journal of the History of Sexuality vol 21 pages 282-96 - summarised here, but the whole thing is worth a read) recounts the records of four medieval Irish saints who miraculously “cured” unwanted pregnancies, one of them being no less than St Brigid of Kildare. Prof. Callan also transcribes the medieval Irish recommendations of what penance to impose on a woman who confesses to abortion - in one text, less than half the penance for carrying a child to full term and giving birth; for another, it is half the penance imposed on a man who has extramarital sex. Basically, for the medieval Irish church, God might well be on the side of a woman who wanted to terminate her unwanted pregnancy.

I have come on a significant personal journey on this issue. I was educated in the Catholic system in Belfast, and accepted the doctrine which we were taught (and had to regurgitate for our compulsory O-level in R.E.): that human life begins at conception and abortion is therefore always wrong. It seemed logically coherent on its own terms. As an undergraduate I campaigned for David Alton’s bill which would have reduced the term limits for abortion in England, Scotland and Wales, to the extent of visiting Parliament as part of a mass (unsuccessful) lobby. I actually had to withdraw from a spot in a national Lib Dem student slate in 1989 when it became clear that my record on the issue would be a problem. (My replacement, ironically enough, was a younger chap called Tim Farron; I wonder what happened to him?)

But despite my public commitment, I became troubled by two things. The first was that although back then (and until not all that many years ago) I counted myself as a practicing Catholic, my research into the history of the Church’s position on the issue revealed some serious inconsistencies. The logical coherence that I had valued was not there. Maeve Callan’s research was not yet available, but it was perfectly clear that, for instance, St Augustine condemned early-stage abortion as equally (but no more) sinful than sex outside marriage, or marital sex using contraception, both of those being activities which he strongly opposed but that I have enjoyed without, I like to think, any lasting moral harm. The Catholic Church’s dogmatic firmness that full human life begins at conception dates only from 1869, and to assert now (as many pro-lifers do) that it goes back to the earliest times of Christianity is simple dishonesty about theological history. The early picture is murky, as is the picture from Classical times. I don’t go all the way with those who see Numbers 5:11-31 as a text allowing the local priest to terminate an embarrassing pregnancy by magic ritual, but I can see their point. (Going a lot further back, the origin of pregnancy itself is murkier still.)

The second thing that troubled me, frankly, was that although some of my closest friends were also pro-life, many of the other pro-life activists who I dealt with were simply on a completely different political wavelength to me in many other respects, and in addition some of them were not very nice people at all; meanwhile most of the people who I generally had more in common with politically and personally were also pro-choice. (The National Union of Students had a joke: “How many pro-lifers does I take to change a lightbulb?” “The lightbulb may not be working, but I’m going to ignore that and tell you about a much more important issue.”) I have never minded being a maverick, but I started looking around and wondering if it was them or if it was me, and I came to the conclusion that it was quite probably me. I strongly relate to this moving account by an evangelical American former pro-lifer of her growing awareness that the supposedly "pro-life" movement was in reality anything but. (See also U.S. Congressman Tim Ryan.)

So I underwent a quiet change of mind, with no particular need to speak out on it one way or the other. Since the proposition that full human life begins at conception is not tenable, all we are left with is the question of where and when to draw the line, which is obviously a matter for legislation and not the constitution. The issue was not raised once as an issue when I last stood for public election, in 1996, and I doubt that I will ever stand for election again. On the other hand it became increasingly clear to me that a healthy society is a society where everyone is able to make free choices about how they shall live: most fundamentally, whether and how to have children. The State should in general stay out of people’s decisions about fertility, except in so far as it prevents abuse and maximises the available options. Talking to people who have directly made the decision themselves one way or the other reinforced my change of mind.

Many years on, becoming a parent has confirmed my scepticism of the pro-life agenda. I love both of my daughters very dearly. But life with them has not always been easy. I would not condemn any prospective parent who had the opportunity to avoid such an experience of parenthood, and took it. (See also this piece on the Eighth Amendment debate by the father of a girl with Down Syndrome.) This is a very different issue from fatal fetal abnormality, of course, an issue which in my view unhelpfully restricts the discussion even though it is the least defensible aspect of the Irish situation. We need to emphasise the right to choose parenthood positively, a point made quietly but well by Rachel.

Even more so when I consider the awful prospect that either of my daughters might become pregnant, which could only come about as a result of molestation; both are physically mature, but neither is remotely capable of consent. I have no doubt at all that we would exercise our legal authority to have such a pregnancy terminated. A consistent pro-lifer would have to argue that our potential grandchild should not have to pay the penalty of its father's crime or its mother's incapacity. Such arguments frankly do not interest me in the slightest.

Coming back to Ireland, it’s clear that on its own terms the Eighth Amendment has failed. (And I could write a lot more about the crazy times of the 1983 referendum, the Kerry Babies and Ann Lovett, but that will have to wait.) Thousands of Irish women every year still go to England, or to other countries, or get pills mailed to them, to terminate their pregnancies. The defenders of the Eighth Amendment seem to have little to say about that. If the intention was truly to stop abortions from happening, the effect has been to ensure that unwanted pregnancies are restricted to women without the necessary resources to end them. (A similar point is made in this piece by a Texas woman who found Texas had placed so many obstacles in the way of getting a legal and necessary abortion that she had to go to another state.) And, of course, another effect of the Eighth Amendment is that medical care for women fails them because necessary abortions are banned, most notoriously and fatally in the case of Savita Halappanavar.

In four Irish referendums since 1983, two attempts to strengthen the ban by excluding the threat of suicide have been rejected by voters (in 1992 and 2002) while two proposals to recognise reality by formally permitting women to travel abroad for abortions and to access relevant information have been approved (both in 1992). Really it is ridiculous, in any field of policy, for this level of fine detail of women’s rights to be regulated by the blunt instruments of constitutional amendment and referendum.

Ireland now faces another vote on abortion. The new Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, has committed to holding another referendum. A specially convened Citizens’ Assembly recommended last June that Article 40.3.3° be replaced by a new text explicitly allowing for legislation on abortion. The parliamentary committee charged with the subject last month recommended the straight repeal of Article 40.3.3° without any new text (rightly so; any new text will quickly become a traumatic litigation playground). High profile politicians including opposition leader Micheal Martin and government MEP Brian Hayes have endorsed the straight repeal option. The tide appears to be turning.

And who knows, maybe it will even reach Northern Ireland next?

My tweets

War and Turpentine, by Stefan Hermans

Second paragraph of third section:
Het is 1976, zomer, de zomer die in het geheugen van een generatie zou worden geprent door de uitzonderlijke warmte en droogte. Hij is oud; hij heeft de afgelopen dertien jaar aan deze memoires geschreven, met tussenpozen. Soms liet hij het schrift ook weken liggen, een enkele keer zelfs een half jaar; dat was toen hij over zijn derde kwetsuur moest schrijven, en het verraad van de officieren, zoals hij het noemde. Naast hem liggen zijn decoraties, die heeft hij vandaag weer even bovengehaald omdat de herinneringen zo levendig waren. Toevallig is met de beschrijving van het eerste weerzien met Maria ook dit tweede cahier bijna vol; de resterende lege bladzijden volstaan niet om alles weer te geven. Hij aarzelt, legt de pen neer, haalt een mapje van onder zijn bureaulegger, begint aan een brief:

Mijn dierbare Gabrielle,
als ik aan de dood van uw dierbare zuster peins....

Hij legt de pen weer neer, er komen geen woorden.
It is 1976, summer, a summer that will be etched into the memory of a generation as exceptionally hot and dry. He is old; he has spent the past thirteen years working on these memoirs, on and off. There were times when he left the notebook unopened for weeks, once for as long as six months — that was when the time came to write about his third wound, and the officers' treachery, as he called it. Beside him are his medals, which he went looking for today because his memories were so vivid. Coincidentally, his first encounter with Maria Emelia has brought him almost to the end of this second notebook; there is not enough room on the remaining pages to tell the rest of the story. He hesitates, puts down his pen, pulls a folder from under his blotter, and starts a letter:

My beloved Gabrielle,
When I contemplate the death of your beloved sister ...


He puts the pen back down; the words won't come.
Someone kind recommended this to me on Facebook, and because of the lousy archiving there I can't now see who it was. Good call. It's a very moving memoir by Hertmans of his grandfather's experiences before, during and after the first world war in Belgium. The first and last parts are presented as factual narrative, but the large middle section is a fictional reconstruction of what happened to his grandfather (though no doubt based on such documentation as is available).

It struck particularly close to home in that on his first day at war in August 1914, young Urbain actually marches with his fellow-troopers from his home in the west of the country through our home village and ends up spending a few nights in the village further east where my daughter now lives. I scratched my head about the geography - it is stated that he marched through Steenokkerzeel, then Oud-Heverlee, then Leuven/Louvain, which is not a very direct route:

big pictureCollapse )

But if we bear in mind that the E40 was not built until the late 1960s, and that the other main roads would have been full of refugees fleeing westwards, it actually makes sense that to reach Leuven the troops would have made a southern detour. When they reached the Statiestraat, now the Bondgenotenlaan (the long street going at just north of three o'clock from the centre of Leuven) it was completely empty. It must have been a very tough march. Google says that the whole march from Dendermonde to Hakendover, given the route taken through Londerzeel, Steenokkerzeel, Oud-Heverlee and Leuven, would take almost 17 hours on foot today. (Over an hour is added by the detour to Oud-Heverlee, but as I said I think the press of traffic on the main roads would have been pretty severe.)

Apart from that local colour, the first part on impoverished Flemish life pre-war is heartfelt, the general portrayal in the second part of how Flemish soldiers were treated by francophone officers during the horrible events of the war gives one some understanding of how the war experience led to the growth of a Flemish consciousness (the officers consistently mispronounce Urbain's surname, Martien, to end "-shan" rather than "-teen"), and the third part recounting Urbain's subsequent love life (he becomes entangled sequentially with two sisters, and basically marries the wrong one) is very moving as well.

There's also food for thought in the close Belgian relationship with England, Liverpool figuring particularly strongly - a reservoir of historic goodwill which has been stupidly squandered by the current British government.

Well worth getting.

My tweets

Tags:

The morning after Hamilton, Anne and I had hoped to get down to the Dulwich Picture Gallery to see the Tove Jansson exhibition; but time was against us, so we settled for the National Gallery instead, just a short walk from the place we were staying opposite Foyle's.

I confess that I had never actually been to the National Gallery before, and we only had an hour and a half. So it was a quick zoom through to The Ambassadors, The Rokeby Venus, and The Sunflowers, and whatever else we could fit in.

In the Van Dyck room, one portrait jumped out at me: Lord John Stuart and his Brother.


These two kids are both wealthy, privileged teenagers, cousins of the king (and his wards since the early death of their father), about to set off on a three year tour of Europe. John, on the left, is 17 and Bernard, on the right, is 16. You can tell that they are brothers, and indeed you can tell that they are related to the king from their noses. Van Dyck never got around to finishing the background, but concentrated on the swagger and fine garments of his subjects, the two youngest of the many children of the Duke of Lennox. I don't think the effect is as flattering as they no doubt thought it was.

The portrait was painted in 1638. Soon after they returned from Europe, England was at war, and both boys were knighted in 1642 and soon were made generals, despite their total lack of any relevant experience. And both were killed in combat at the age of 22ish, John at the battle of Cheriton in 1644, and Bernard at the Battle of Rowton Heath in 1645, just before he would have been created the Earl of Lichfield. In 1066 And All That, W.C. Sellar memorably described the Cavaliers as "Wrong but Wromantic", and this portrait beautifully illustrates that. (He also described the Roundheads as "Right but Repulsive"; from the Irish perspective, I'd agree with half of that.)

Lots more to see in the National Gallery; but someone wise once advised me to look out for the one thing that jumps out at you when you are at an exhibition, and this was what jumped out at me this time.

Hamilton in London

Anne and I went to see Hamilton in London on Tuesday night - tickets booked a year ago, which turned out to be absolutely lousy timing from the work point of view where things are exceptionally busy right now, but there you go.

The show really is fantastic. I was lucky enough to get to the Chicago run just over a year ago; I enjoyed that a lot, but I enjoyed London more (in fairness a couple of principals were absent the day I attended the Chicago show). I thought that London had dared to differ a bit more from the Broadway original, which is not a bad thing at all. My one complaint is that the sound mixing in London was not always good enough to hear all of the words properly; I had a similar complaint about Chicago but I think London was a bit worse in this regard. (There are three minor changes to the lyrics for the English audience.)

One bit of staging that I missed in Chicago - it may have been there but I wasn't alerted to it until Sarah Whitfield's lecture at Eastercon last year - is the strong suggestion that Hamilton and Laurens may be a bit more than best buddies. (As of this writing there are 66,587 Alexander Hamilton/John Laurens bookmarks in An Archive Of Our Own.) I think the London space is slightly bigger as well, though the ensemble filled it with whirling bodies.

There are a lot of strong performances, particularly:

Jamael Westman in the title role takes Hamilton on a very clear journey from awkward, hungry student to cocky right-hand-man to politician undone by his own hubris. He doesn’t dominate the stage as I imagine Lin-Manuel Miranda may have done; instead he is the leading character of a strong ensemble. He is the least experienced of the leads - only 25, in his first major role, more than a decade younger than Miranda - but we’ll hear more of him. Here he is, not throwing away his shot.



Giles Terera as Aaron Burr differed even more from the Chicago and Broadway performances. With his long face and lugubrious expression, he starts off as comic foil to Westman's Hamilton, only gradually darkening to become his nemesis. Anne got an extra bonus when Terera fixed her directly with his steely gaze when singing “Dear Theodosia”. (In the clip of the Schuyler sisters below, he is standing on the left at the start.)

Michael Jibson as King George carried off beautifully the nuance of portraying the character just a short walk from where the real George III lived, rather than in the country that broke away from his rule. He too used the performance space to interact electrifyingly with the audience. Jason Pennycooke is impressive as both Lafayette and Jefferson - not quite as show-stealing as Chris De'Sean Lee's Jefferson was in Chicago, but maybe a bit more thoughtful in implementation. Anne also thought that Obioma Ugoala was very good as Washington. It’s the one role where I felt the Chicago counterpart, Jonathan Kirkland, was better; which is not a complaint.



The three female leads, Rachelle Anne Go as Eliza, Christine Allado as Peggy/Maria and in particular Rachel John as Angelica were superb - I had forgotten how much of the narrative Angelica carries in the second half. There was a real feeling of character arc for her and even more for Eliza. And to single out one of the ensemble - Leah Miller is great as the bullet in the duel scenes. (In the two clips, she is the shortest of the dancers, with big hair, who comes into view immediately behind Burr at the start of the Schuyler sisters' song.)

I felt a real energy in the room - perhaps it all still seems new to the performers, barely a month into the run, and of course the audience all knew the sound track well but were excited by the live version. I was surprised (and pleased) by the fact that probably three quarters of the audience looked younger than us. (I think the last public performance I went to was a Mary Black concert in Brussels where I was perhaps a little below the average age...)

We stayed in an AirBNB just opposite Foyle's, over the Phoenix Theatre, and walked the two miles to the Victoria Palace Theatre and back - "Hamilton West End" is a bit of a misnomer; I booked the accommodation without checking where the show was actually taking place!

Anyway, in short, we loved it.

Tags:

My tweets

An Old Captivity, by Nevil Shute

Second paragraph of third chapter:
He said quietly at last: “I hadn’t reckoned on that. That makes it very difficult.”
A fascinating book by Shute. His usual competent engineer hero is tasked with organising an archaeologist's air photography mission to Greenland, sponsored by the archaeologist's rich elder brother, and to his dismay accompanied by the archaeologist's daughter. The planning and implementation of the expedition are lovingly detailed; the year is roughly 1937 (the book was published in 1940, but there is no mention of impending war).

And then three quarters of the way through, we have a sudden shift; and our competent engineer hero falls into a coma and dreams of a past life as a Scottish slave among the Viking settlers of Greenland, with the professor's daughter being his lover's reincarnation. That part of the story told on its own could easily fall into total cliche, but the fact that we have had a couple of hundred pages of technical exposition beforehand makes it tremendously effective. A very pleasant surprise. Well worth getting.

Latest Month

February 2018
S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728   

Tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by yoksel