ethel and ernest…

Moira and I went along to the Watershed this afternoon to see Roger Mainwood’s film “Ethel and Ernest” – based on Raymond Briggs’ autobiographical graphic novel about his parents Ethel and Ernest.
I’m a huge fan of Raymond Briggs. I used to love reading  “Father Christmas Goes On Holiday” to our daughters (and subsequently to our grandchildren) and, now, Christmas just wouldn’t be Christmas without me inflicting “The Snowman” and “Father Christmas” DVDs on to grandchildren – whether they want to see them or not!
I also find it quite amusing that Briggs himself now appears to despise Christmas… “I don’t like the Christmas thing at all. It’s so full of anxiety – have I got enough stuff? Where am I going to go? What should I give for presents?”…
Well, I found this animated film rather lovely (Brenda Blethyn’s and Jim Broadbent’s voices are just perfect). Predictably charming and ordinary… and very much capturing Briggs’ style.
It re-tells half-remembered family stories – some sad, some very funny; it reminds those of us of a certain age about how things were and about how much things have changed for our children… and their children.
In many ways, it was like watching a picture about my own parents’ life and marriage… albeit set some 15 years earlier (E+E met in the late-1920s, R+M met in the mid-1940s):

·         Ethel+Ernest were, like my parents Ron+Mary, from a working class background.

·         Ethel and Mary had a somewhat similar, simplistic, attitude to life – the family was everything and what was happening in the world beyond the family never seemed to be important to them (BUT they were both critical of the length of their son’s hair!).

·         Ernest was a milkman (with socialist tendencies!) and a bit of dreamer who took a keen interest in what was happening in the world via newspapers and the radio (and later TV). Despite his working class roots, Ron always voted Conservative; he was a compositor (printer) and was always keen to educate himself (he would have LOVED the internet!). After being made redundant fairly late in his working life, he ended up driving a bread delivery van – so, again, a bit like Ernest.

·        Raymond Briggs himself is 15 years older than me… was a grammar school boy and then went to Art School (The Slade) – much to his parents’ bewilderment; I went to grammar school (and my parents were alarmed when I was put into the fast ‘Remove’ stream and somewhat sceptical about me going to study architecture at university - the first in our family to do so… and why on earth couldn’t I stay in Birmingham to study for goodness sake?!).

·         Like Ethel+Ernest, Ron+Mary (eventually) owned a Triumph Herald… and like me, Raymond owned a Mini van!

·         Ethel+Ernest had a very good marriage and enjoyed a good life. The same could be said for my parents… and I’m so grateful that they did.

“Ethel and Ernest” is a predictably nostalgic film – at times, moving, powerful and funny. The way Ernest stared at the sunset from his back garden or at the view across miles of open landscape with Raymond, is somewhat reminiscent of Ron’s (and Mary’s) appreciation of the world’s beauty.

It’s a wonderfully evocative film and, for me, what I REALLY liked was its quiet, proud ‘ordinariness’ and the way it honours ordinary lives.

I, Daniel Blake...

Moira and I went along to the Watershed this afternoon to see Ken Loach’s acclaimed film “I, Daniel Blake”. It’s the story of the friendship between an out-of-work, 59 year-old carpenter (Daniel Blake) and young single mother… who are both forced to navigate the challenges of the welfare system in Newcastle-on-Tyne.
Blake (brilliantly played by Dave Johns) is recovering from a heart attack, but not yet allowed (by his doctor and consultant) to return to work. As a result, he has to apply for Employment and Support Allowance… but, in its wisdom, the government has decreed that his benefits will be taken away unless he looks for work (but he can’t work because his doctors have said he can’t… etc etc). This is all made worse by the fact that all the required forms have to be completed online (and Daniel hasn’t a clue about computers).
You get the picture.
Meanwhile, Daniel befriends Katie (again, brilliantly played by Hayley Squires) at the local Jobcentre… she’s being messed around by the “system” (which has included her being relocated with her two children from a London homeless shelter) and he endeavours to intervene (unsuccessfully, of course).
They develop an unlikely, but very supportive, mutual alliance… but they struggle to avoid being crushed by the bureaucracy.
It’s a massively powerful, beautiful, sad, emotional (and, sometimes, even funny) film.
Yes, it’s Ken Loach (what would you expect?).
Yes, it’s ‘only’ a film.
But, sadly, it IS based on reality… people who genuinely struggle to provide for their families – many just managing thanks largely to foodbanks… and some who just don’t manage; people who struggle with farcical bureaucracy and with political ideologies. As Loach has said: “Few people are aware of what’s going on, and the scale of it, affecting hundreds of thousands of people, many of them feeling ashamed”.
Honest, hard-working, humble, good people.
It’s a film that will shock and sadden you.
It‘s a film about humiliation, degradation and despair.
And yet, it’s also a film about hope and goodness.
It’s a film that will probably make you cry and, if it’s anything like our experience today, it’s a film that the audience will applaud at the end (how many times does that happen?).
You definitely need to see this film… and so should all our politicians who deal with welfare and housing issues (Iain Duncan Smith has an awful lot to answer for)…
In fact, EVERYONE should see this brilliant film.

nessi gomes...

Last night was the second concert in a week for me (well, the third if you count the free lunchtime concert on Monday!)… so, not quite a ‘normal’ week for me as far as music is concerned.
I first came to hear about yesterday’s concert at Saint Stephen’s church through a friend (who, like me, also happens to be a member of this church’s rather special community). I knew nothing about Nessi Gomes – except that she was on a tour to launch her new album (released on 14 October), that she was a British-Portuguese singer-songwriter, that she was voted Winner of Best Unsigned Female Singer 2016… and that tickets cost just £7!
So, hopes for a good evening… but with limited expectations perhaps?
The evening started well with support singer/guitarist Sennen Timcke. Gomes followed him immediately on stage (just her, no interval)… she spoke a few words… which I couldn’t quite hear (it wasn’t just me, by the way)… the phrase “limited expectations” went through my head!
But then she started to play her guitar… and you just knew “it was going to be alright”!
I’m pretty useless at describing these things but, for me, it conjured up thoughts of Leonard Cohen’s guitar. Her voice turned out to be quite stunning too… dark, powerful, haunting, mournful. Her songs were melancholic, reflective and very beautiful. I’ve been trying to think who she reminds me of… but can’t really put my finger on anyone in particular (which probably reflects my lack of knowledge in these areas!)… perhaps Kate Bush on occasions? Joanna Newsom maybe? 
Anyway, another really excellent evening (lucky me). Yes, Nessi Gomes is a bit special... and you should definitely get to see/hear her if you possibly can.
Photo: Nessi Gomes, from last night’s concert.
PS: check out the website to hear some of her music.

october 2016 books...

More book stuff:
5 Days In May (Andrew Adonis): An absolutely fascinating book (published in 2013) about the UK 2010 general election and coalition negotiations – as seen from the perspective of a Labour insider (and based on his notes of the time). It frequently felt like an episode from “West Wing”! Fascinating to read the contrasting comments of some Labour MPs at the time about the prospect of a Lab-Lib coalition: “If we don’t seize it (the opportunity of a coalition), the Tories could lock us out of power for a generation”… and ”We lost the election. By getting out now, we can regroup and we will back soon. This lot (the prospect of a Con-Lib coalition) won’t last five years, no chance…”. Inevitably, the book contains a number of interesting insights/reminders, such as Nick Clegg declaring (the day after the election) that he felt the chance to form a government should go to the largest party (when his Party’s instincts would surely have been to join with Labour?)… and the unpopularity of Gordon Brown and his apparent lack of team-playing skills (certainly compared with David Cameron’s gift of the gab and his ability to schmooze!). What I also found quite surprising (perhaps I should have known?) were the political instincts and backgrounds of Clegg and David Laws (key member of the Lib Dem negotiating team): Clegg has a privileged Home Counties, public school-educated background in the same mould as Cameron+Osborne; he worked with Tory Leon Brittan in Brussels (one Lib Dem MEP reckoned: “if the Conservative Party had been how it used to be under Edward Heath, Nick would be a Tory, albeit a natural liberal, pro-Europe Tory like Chris Patten and Ken Clarke”). Laws is from a similar background. Adonis sums up the key issue thus: “Why did Clegg turn Right? Because, on the big economic questions, he is on the Right, not the Left; and so too is David Laws, his chief strategist”. Interesting also is Adonis’s assertion that,  ultimately, the Lib Dems allowed themselves to be steam-rollered by the Tories. I’ll endeavour to read ‘alternative’ accounts of this time in due course (eg. Clegg’s book “Politics: Between the Extremes” and Laws’s book “22 Days in May”).   
Lazy Thoughts Of A Lazy Girl (Jenny Wren): This is a short book of comic essays (Jenny Wren is a pseudonym), first published over a hundred years ago in 1891 (and republished by Hesperus in 2010) “offering a woman’s take on life’s preoccupations”… as the jacket of my copy of the book aptly describes it. It really is rather wonderful – imagine it being written by a female Jerome K Jerome and you’ve got it! Essay subjects include love, politics, afternoon tea, children+dogs and watering places! A lovely ‘find’ in Bristol’s “The Last Bookshop” for £2-50.
The Iceberg (Marion Coutts): Another bargain from “The Last Bookshop”. This remarkable, extraordinary book (published in 2014) is an account of Tom Lubbock’s three year battle with a brain tumour – located in the area controlling speech and language (he died in 2010, aged 53). It’s written by his wife (Coutts is a lecturer in Fine Art at Goldsmiths College, London). Lubbock was an artist, illustrator and chief art critic of The Independent. When Lubbock’s illness was first diagnosed in 2008, their son was 18 months old. I found the book completely compelling… and powerful, poignant, honest, blunt, sensitive, funny, enlightening and defiant. It’s beautifully written – it has a quiet eloquence, together with a poetic elegance. Her sentences are quite short, but to the point. The book charts the deterioration of Tom’s speech (somewhat ironically coinciding, of course, with their son’s developing language skills), but it also narrates how the three of them tried to cope with Tom’s inevitable death. It’s a wonderful book – probably my book of the year thus far (ie. of those I’ve read this year). I read it within two days, but I think it will live with me for a long, long time.
The Girl On The Train (Paula Hawkins): No, I haven’t seen the film (but, from what I hear, it’s a big disappointment compared to the book)! Hawkins’s book is a psychological thriller told through the eyes of three women. One of them, Rachel (who happens to be an alcoholic) catches the same commuter train every morning; she knows the journey by heart – including the fact the train will wait at the same signal each time, overlooking a row of back gardens. But, one day, she sees something that distresses her… and that’s when things get a bit dramatic! I certainly found the book compulsive reading – full of interesting, flawed characters and a clever storyline. If I have a criticism, I thought the ending was a little weak and somewhat tame compared with the rest of the novel - despite its various twists and turns. Nevertheless, a very good book – which I simply couldn’t put down.
Tarantula (Bob Dylan): I bought this Dylan short book a few months ago (his only fictional book incidentally, written in 1965/66 but first published in 1971). I have to admit that, at that time, I read the first few pages and gave up… it felt as if he’d written it when out of his head on drugs (or maybe I’d just drunk too much red wine?). Anyway, following his recent Nobel Prize for Literature (which I completely endorse), I thought I’d give it another try… Well, as much as I love Dylan’s music, I’m afraid this “experimental prose poetry collection” (as I’ve seen it described) wasn’t for me and I haven’t changed my initial assessment. Actually, I DID enjoy some of the ‘letters’… and his verbal playfulness (at times, he’s very clever!). The following is just a very brief sample, taken completely at random, to give you a flavour: “juicy roses to coughing hands assembling k pluck national anthems! all hail! the football field ablaze with doves k alleyways where hitchhikers wandering k setting fire to their pockets resounding with the nuns k tramps k discarding the weedy Syrians, surfs of half-reason, the jack k jills k wax Michael from the church acre, who cry in their prime k gag of their twins…”. Largely unintelligible to me.

lisa hannigan at the thekla...

I first came across Lisa Hannigan in 2002, as the ‘second voice’ on Damien Rice’s excellent “O” album - in particular the amazing song “Cold Water” (if you don’t know it, check it out!). I’ve enjoyed her music ever since then… but, until last night, had never seen her perform.
Ruth and I went to see/hear her at The Thekla (the place was absolutely crammed)… and Hannigan was absolutely stunningly good. Her soaring voice is so pure and precise (but also incredibly versatile). The songs were beautiful (I was familiar with most of them – her new album “At Swim” is lovely) and she really is VERY impressive ‘live’. It’s difficult to categorise her music – probably simplest to check out her website in order to learn more.
I love concerts at The Thekla (if you don’t know, it’s a big metal boat moored at the harbourside) – it’s a unique venue with an intimate atmosphere.
This could well have been my best concert EVER! It’s certainly up there.
If you get a chance to see her, do it!
Quite superb.
Photo: Lisa Hannigan on stage last night...
PS: Ruth+I got the best ‘seats’ in the house (ok, it’s all standing, but you know what I mean!). We were there right at the start of the evening and, thanks to Ruth’s insight, made our way to the balcony. It’s a pretty small balcony, but we stood on the extreme right hand side which meant we had a brilliant view over the small stage… and we didn’t have people trying to push past us or elbow us out of the way!
PPS: The most bizarre thing about the evening was that the bar had no red wine(!)… it’s a BAR for goodness sake! Who forgot to re-stock?!

american honey…

Marcus and I went to the Watershed last night to see Andrea Arnold’s “American Honey”. This long film (it’s 164 minutes long!) is something of a ‘road movie’ – with, for me, hints of “Easy Rider” at times. It features a group of hard-partying teenagers criss-crossing America’s Midwest selling magazine subscriptions (and also frequently stealing food from shops and jewellery from households in the process). It’s a hard, raw life and each member of the group is given strict rules they have to adhere to (from their “queen bee”/American Honey(?), Krystal – brilliantly played by Riley Keough) if they want to survive.
If they don’t perform, they’re kicked out…

A girl named Star (played by the very impressive Sasha Lane), who lives on the fringes of society – living off discarded food from skips – comes across the group at a service station. Compared with her lifestyle, these youngsters look as though they’re having fun. They’re wild, exuberant and apparently carefree. She’s immediately attracted to one member of the group called Jake (played by Shia LaBeouf) – a sort of senior “lieutenant” – who asks her to join them (he gets commission for recruiting new members!)… she’s got nothing to lose.

Very quickly, Star and Jake form a magnetic, passionate(!) attraction for each other… which ultimately offends “queen bee” and underlines Star’s uncertain place within the group.

To be honest, I’m still not sure how I rated the film… I liked the soundtrack and the energy and spontaneity of the group, but I also found it all rather depressing (and too long?)… there was a powerful sense of hopelessness… and inevitability.

But that’s probably what Arnold is trying to say.
Life being lived on the edge.

living in a parallel universe?…

I don’t think I’ve ever felt quite as depressed, angry and hopeless about UK politics as I’ve found myself feeling over recent months (this last week has felt particularly disheartening).
Well, to be honest, this probably goes back to the start of 2015, at least… just before the last General Election (not that I was exactly a bundle of joy following the outcome of the 2010 election!).
I remember precisely how I felt when the exit poll results were announced on television at the end of 7 May… utterly shattered. I watched in downright disbelief. How could the electorate be so stupid?*  
I also remember thinking at that time just how strange it was that I appeared to inhabit a virtual world (via facebook!) in which most of my friends shared my thoughts and aspirations for the world, poverty, war, climate change, taxation, health, education, justice… (the list is quite long!).
Unfortunately, clearly, there was a parallel virtual world inhabited by people with largely opposite political viewpoints(!)… and these were obviously in the slight majority (hence the election result).
Sadly, as far as the real world was concerned, things haven’t been helped in the UK Parliament by a completely ineffective Opposition – which continues to fail to challenge the government over a wide variety of crucial issues.

Fast forward to 23 June 2016 - EU Referendum Day – and things got massively worse! The Referendum vote (which, incidentally, is ADVISORY, not mandatory… and which surely should therefore mean that parliament needs to vote on whether or not the UK stays in the EU?) has actually resulted in the government deciding to ‘pick+choose’ which of the MANY messages in the Brexit vote it wants to listen to (mainly immigration, sovereignty… it seems) and which it decides to ignore (once again, the list is long). For goodness sake, it wasn’t like a General Election – with an opportunity to reverse the decision in 5 years’ time – no, it’s a decision that affects our children, their children and their grandchildren. It didn’t matter that the resulting 52%:48% majority was so narrow. It didn’t matter that the campaign produced lies from BOTH sides of the argument (but far more from the Brexit people in my view).

Once again, I seemed to be living in facebook virtual world of people who largely shared my beliefs and aspirations, but lost out to the alternative facebook equivalent universe.
I remember feeling absolutely devastated by the vote for days and days (and, frankly, still haven’t recovered… as we continue to hear how our government interprets the voters’ wishes!).

It’s been interesting/depressing/alarming/reassuring talking to various people about the situation. One or two have suggested we all move to Scotland (only half-jokingly?) – assuming that the SNP will launch another Independence Referendum in the light of the EU decision… and that voters will opt to follow the ‘Remain’ option. Others complain about the country being London-centric – with huge concentration on the relatively small Westminster parliamentary ‘village’. Other people point to the fact that many of our population (especially in the north of England) feel ignored by politicians and that the EU Referendum represented a valid way of making an effective ‘protest’… and then there’s been the ‘Occupy’ movement too.

All this has set me thinking…
Given how much the world has changed over the past 25 years or so (since the internet, for example), would it really be possible – perhaps, before 2050 – for us to be living lives in which we could opt in or out of various ‘society options’? In other words, allow us (ok, I’m not going to be around by then!) to live our lives in a world of like-minded people – a bit like the facebook virtual world I seem to be inhabiting today, but where our life-style preferences can actually become reality?
Fantasy? Really? Who knows?
If someone had told you 10 years ago that we were going to be having driver-less cars in the near future, would you have believed them? If someone had told my father (he died 24 years ago) that we’d ALL have computers in our homes or that people would be able to contact each other instantly on tiny phones that each of us would carry around with us in our pockets, he would have laughed at our naivety…
Maybe reading Paul Mason’s book “Postcapitalism” has simply made me question how we do things… and how we’ll do things in the future, for example:  
“The main contradiction today is between the possibility of free, abundant goods and information and a system of monopolies, banks and governments trying to keep things private, scarce and commercial. Everything comes down to the struggle between the network and the hierarchy, between old forms of society moulded around capitalism and new forms of society that prefigure what comes next”.
Yes, I could list a whole multitude of issues that, on the face of it, couldn’t be resolved in the sort of world I’m trying to imagine… and, no doubt, someone will also point me to extensive research currently being undertaking on a virtual reality world… or maybe it’ll just be a case of all the banks, governments, corporations or the establishment simply won’t allow it?!
Just remember this blog post in the year 2050(!)… you’ll be scratching your heads trying to remember the name of that old bloke who vaguely talked about the alternative, virtual world that had actually become a reality!
Yeh, right!

*: Actually, I’ve had huge reservations about so-called ‘democracy’ for several years: I certainly wouldn’t trust the UK electorate to vote on hanging, for example (and I obviously wouldn’t have allowed them to decide about the EU!)... I’m afraid I think we have a massively-biased press and media which are all too ready to inflict their views on what I regard as a sadly gullible population!

Photo: Hayward Gallery, London (Carsten Holler: 'Decision' exhibition 2015).

art projects…

It’s been a bit of a strange day… (no, rest assured, nothing to do with the Tory Party Conference!).
Today, couriers delivered the “results” of TWO art projects I’ve been working on.
One of them relates to an ongoing venture (my daily “One Day Like This” blog) and the other to a 2017 Calendar of some of my Bristol drawings (very much a one-off undertaking!).
Firstly, I organised a Blurb book to mark four years of my daily “One Day Like This” blog (since 12 September 2012, I’ve been posting one of my drawings or photographs every day). It’s purely a record, for my own reference – I made a similar book after the blog’s first year. This time, I’ve included a random collection of both drawings and photographs… but, as you can imagine (after posting more than 700 photographs and 700 drawings over the past four years!), the “final” selection represents only a very small percentage of the total output!
Secondly, I decided to put together some drawings of Bristol in the form of a calendar. This is a very speculative project, as you might imagine(!)… I hope to sell copies for £15 in perhaps three Bristol shops on the run-up to Christmas (and also to friends via facebook). I’ll post some images on facebook in due course… and will nag people incessantly until they finally give in and purchase their own highly-prized copy (obviously!).
Photo: my “Four Years Like This” Blurb book and the back page of my Calendar of drawings.

september 2016 books…

More book stuff:
Coffin Road (Peter May): I didn’t think an “eco-thriller” (as described in the book’s cover blurb) would be my cup of tea, but I was very, very wrong! This is a very clever mystery novel, set on the Hebridean Isle of Harris (maybe the Scottish Highland connection had something to do with my passion for it!?) involving a man who finds himself bewildered and sodden on a deserted beach. He cannot remember who he is… and his only clue to his identity is a folded map of a path named the Coffin Road. I won’t tell you anymore, but I found it an absolutely riveting read… and will be definitely on the look-out for more of May’s work (eg. The Lewis Trilogy – including The Blackhouse). A brilliant book.
Postcapitalism (Paul Mason): I’ve long been an admirer of Mason’s journalism (he was Channel4 News’s former Economics Editor), but this is the first opportunity to read his extended thoughts in book form. This ambitious and challenging book analyses the capitalist world we live in and suggests that we’re about to enter a whole new world… of postcapitalism – in which the technical/information revolution is about to reshape our notions of work and value. It’s a brilliant book - complex, articulate and compelling (I’ve also written a separate, extended blog post about the book).
Troubles (J G Farrell): This is our Book Group’s latest book (first published in 1970). Set in 1919, a relatively-wealthy, English Major travels to Ireland to the Majestic Hotel and to the fiancée he “acquired” on a rash afternoon’s leave three years before. The engagement is short-lived, but he finds it difficult to leave the “alluring discomforts” of the crumbling hotel. It’s a strange and haunting (and frequently funny and ridiculous) story which mixes the emotions of a world emerging from the Great War, the upheaval and the politics of the Irish War of Independence and a harking back to life before the troubles. It’s also fascinating that this book, written at the time of the on-going Irish troubles of its day (eg. Londonderry civil rights march 1968 onwards), acts as a firm reminder of the guerrilla war fought in that country from 1919 to 1921. But it would be wrong if I gave the impression that this is simply a book about war/conflict… it’s almost entirely set within the walls/grounds of the shabby hotel “surrounded by gently decaying old ladies and proliferating cats”… it contains some intriguing characters and is a compelling, original story. I very much enjoyed it. Footnote: my one gripe would be that the entire book (some 450 pages long) is written without chapters or breaks (the best it can provide is the VERY occasional one line gap between paragraphs or, if you’re really lucky, a random isolated asterisk) and this chapter-less format definitely limiting my enjoyment… aargh!
Revelations of Divine Love (Julian of Norwich): This is the first time I’ve attempted to read the full account of the sixteen visions (or ‘shewings’) which appeared to Mother Julian (1342-1416)… and I have to admit that I found it pretty tough going (despite the excellent introduction and translation by Clifton Wolters). At the age of thirty, in May 1373, Julian was struck with a serious illness and, as she prayed and prepared for death, she received a series of sixteen visions on the Passion of Christ and the Virgin Mary. Saved from the brink of death, Julian of Norwich dedicated her life to solitary prayer and the contemplation of the visions she had received (“Julian” was the saint’s name of the church she was attached to - as an ‘anchoress’, she was walled up in a cell built on to the church, with food and drink brought to her). She wrote a short account of her visions probably soon after the event (and about 20/30 years later, she recorded down her understanding of them). She wrote in a straightforward ‘Middle English’ (she describes herself as “a simple creature unlettered”) and maintained that the visions provide us with the words of Christ, not hers. Whilst the book increased my awareness of Julian, I’m one of those people who find it difficult to accept that God reveals himself to us in this way. Nevertheless, it is a remarkable, thought-provoking text. I found the book somewhat repetitive (and I have to admit that I didn’t devote adequate time to reflect on the 86 chapters of Julian’s reflections!), although it did offer a mystical and philosophical insight into the medieval mind - whether you are a Christian or not.   
The Love Object and Other Stories (Edna O’Brien): Having recently read Edna O’Brien’s autobiography, I vowed that it was about time I read one of her novels… well, in the end, I opted for a book of short stories instead (eight in all, first published in 1970). Each of the stories has a ‘heroine’ and the synopsis on the book’s back cover sums things up perfectly in my view: with each of the heroines, in their different ways, swinging “between susceptibility and scepticism, between euphoria and agonising disappointment”. O’Brien has an impressive directness in the way she writes… and one senses that many of her characters are taken directly from her own life experiences. As you might imagine, the book (now nearly 50 years old) feels somewhat dated at times… but an enjoyable read nevertheless.

a guide to our future?...

Essentially, this is an extended review of Paul Mason’s book “Postcapitalism”. Reading it was a bit like reading a PhD thesis (actually, I’ve never read one… but this is how I imagine the experience might feel!). He paints a picture of capitalism today (as well as charting its chequered history over the past 200 years or so) and reckons that its long-term prospects are extremely bleak.
He contends that the series impacts of climate change, demographic ageing and population growth kick in around the year 2050… and that “if we can’t create a sustainable global order and restore economic dynamism, the decades after 2050 will be chaos”.

Mason, born in Leigh, Lancashire in 1960, is an articulate, intelligent and fascinating bloke. He graduated from the University of Sheffield with a degree in music and politics in 1981 and went on to work as a music teacher and lecturer in music at Loughborough University. He became a freelance journalist in 1991 and went on to join BBC2’s Newsnight as Business Editor in 2001. In 2013, he became Channel 4 News’s culture and digital editor and later became the programme’s Economics Editor. He left Channel 4 in February 2016 in order to be able to engage more fully in debates on the political left without the constraints of impartiality placed on UK broadcasters. He’s a supporter of Jeremy Corbyn and describes himself as “radical social democrat”.

I found the book absolutely absorbing… and decided that I should jot my thoughts on it in a little more length than my usual one paragraph book review summary. In the book, Mason describes capitalism as a “complex, adaptive system which has reached the limits of its capacity to adapt”. He looks back on the growth of capitalism over the past 200 years or so… and refers to a whole host of key players who he sees as being influential in the development and understanding of the subject – the likes of Piketty, Kondratieff, Nachimson, Slutsky, Schumpeter, Luxemburg, Hilferding, Bukharin and Varga (no, I’d never heard of them either!).

Even though I struggled to understand some of the financial complexities, it was all fascinating stuff!

I stopped scribbling in my books a very long time ago(!), but I KEPT on coming across interesting/depressing/startling/powerful/frightening extracts and, so, my copy has become absolutely covered in pencil underlining and notes! These are just a few “tasters” to give you a (somewhat random) flavour – look, I know this makes it a pretty lengthy blog post(!)… but I think he makes several important points:

“Neoliberalism is the doctrine of uncontrolled markets: it says that the best route to prosperity is individuals pursuing their own self-interest, and the market is the only way to express that self-interest. It says the state should be small…; that financial speculation is good; that the natural state of humankind is to be a bunch of ruthless individuals, competing with each other”.

“…The long-term prospects for capitalism are bleak. According to the OECD, growth in the developed world will be ‘weak’ for the next fifty years. Inequality will rise by 40%. Even in developing countries, the current dynamism will be exhausted by 2060”.  

“The main contradiction today is between the possibility of free, abundant goods and information and a system of monopolies, banks and governments trying to keep things private, scarce and commercial. Everything comes down to the struggle between the network and the hierarchy, between old forms of society moulded around capitalism and new forms of society that prefigure what comes next”.

“The elite and their supporters are lined up to defend the same core principles: high finance, low wages, secrecy, militarism, intellectual property and energy based on carbon. The bad news is that they control nearly every government in the world. The good news is that in most countries they enjoy very little consent or popularity among ordinary people”.

“…Then, through austerity programmes, they transferred the pain away from people who’d invested money stupidly, punishing instead welfare recipients, public sector workers, pensioners and, above all, future generations. In the worst-hit countries, the pension system has been destroyed, the retirement age is being hiked so that those currently leaving university will retire at seventy, and education is being privatized so that graduates will face a lifetime of high debt. Services are being dismantled and infrastructure projects put on hold”.

Mason frequently refers to the 2008 financial crisis (note: according to the New York Times, only ONE top banker has ever been imprisoned in connection with the financial crisis!). The following quote refers to a Lehman executive running the ‘infamous Repo 105’ tactic in an email:

“The tactic involved hiding debts away from Lehman’s balance sheet by temporarily ‘selling’ them and then buying them back once the bank’s quarterly report had been submitted. Another Lehman exec is asked: is the tactic legal, do other banks do it, and is it disguising holes in our balance sheet? He emails back: ‘Yes, no and yes’ :)”.

“We have to try to learn what’s urgent, and what’s important, and that sometimes they do not coincide. If it were not for the external shocks facing us over the next fifty years, we could afford to take things slowly: the state, in a benign transition, would act as the main facilitator of change through regulation. But the enormity of the external shocks means some of the actions we take will have to be immediate, centralized and drastic”.

“In this book, I’ve avoided ‘building in’ the climate change crisis until now… Industrial capitalism has, in the space of 200 years, made the climate 0.8 degrees Celsius hotter, and is certain to push it two degrees higher than the pre-industrial average by 2050… Either we react in time and confront it in a relatively orderly way, or we don’t – and disaster follows”.

“The lesson is: a market-led strategy on climate change is utopian thinking. What are the obstacles to a non-market-led strategy? … Between 2003-2010, climate-denial lobby groups received $558million from donors in the USA. ExxonMobil and the ultra-conservative Koch Industries were major donors until 2007, when there was a tangible shift to funds channelled through anonymous third parties, under pressure of journalistic scrutiny. The outcome? The world spends an estimated $544billion on subsidizing the fossil fuel industry”.

“There is, in short, a rational case for panic about climate change – and it is compounded when you consider the interrelatedness of climate and the other great uncontrolled variant: population… demographic ageing is set to make state finances unsustainable all across the developed world… analysts predict that by 2050, even with a pension cuts, 60% of all countries in the world will have credit ratings below investment grade: it will be suicidal for anybody who does not want to risk losing their money to lend to them”.

“We have not yet considered the impact of migration… By 2050, there will be 1.2billion more people of working age in the world than today… the population of Niger will have grown from its current 18million to 69million. Chad… will see its population treble to 33million. Afghanistan… will rise from 30 to 56million”.

I could go on… and on!

I think Mason is very good in his analysis of what’s “gone before” and in his assessment of the future alarming dangers we face. Looking into the future and pointing the way forward represents a truly massive challenge and he’s brave in his assertions. But, trying to outline these in a mere 30 pages (out of a book some 300 pages long) is perhaps a little over-ambitious. Having said that, he does at least TRY and, although I don’t pretend to understand all the intricacies of his arguments(!), he has thought things through in impressive detail.
To give you just a flavour, these are the sub-headings of his concluding chapter, entitled “Project Zero” (each of these really needs a few lines of explanation… but you’ve probably already lost the will to live!): Five Principles of Transition; Top-Level Goals; Model First, Act Later; The Wiki-State; Expand Collaborative Work; Suppress or Socialize Monopolies; Let Market Forces Disappear; Socialize the Finance System; Pay Everyone a Basic Income; The Network Unleashed; Is This For Real?; and Liberate the One Per Cent.

Whatever your thoughts about Mason’s left-leaning political stance, this is a powerful, thought-provoking book. I’m sure a right-wing political thinker could provide an altogether different view, but I think Gillian Tett (from the Financial Times) sums things up perfectly:

“Even if you love the current capitalist system, it would be a mistake to ignore this book… Politicians of all stripes should take note. And so should the people who vote for them”.
A brilliant, brave book in my view.

captain fantastic…

Moira+I went to the Watershed again this afternoon to see Matt Ross’s “Captain Fantastic” – featuring the excellent Viggo Mortensen in the title role (I thought he was simply brilliant in “The Road”).
Mortensen stars as an idealistic survivalist father (Ben) raising six children “off grid and away from contemporary civilisation” (as the Watershed blurb puts it). He lives in remote forest in Washington State where he home schools them to be “fit in body and mind”. The children do outlandish things like read books(!), hunt for their food and justify their personal opinions. A family crisis forces them to re-enter the “normal” world that they’ve been long separated from. It’s a shock to the system: everyone seems to be overweight compared with them… and then there are the mobile phones, the violent video games and the loud music!
All the child actors are rather wonderful and are a perfect bizarre mix of characters (frankly, I wanted to be Captain Fantastic too - some hope!).
I thought it was an absolutely lovely film. It’s poignant and it’s funny… but it also asks hard questions about society and the way we bring up our families in the hard-nosed, selfish, materialistic world we inhabit today.
PS: The family travel around in a lovely, huge, battered bus (appropriately named “Steve”!). It left me feeling quite envious – I want one (and I’d still only need one Residents Parking Zone permit to park outside our house!). Obviously, we would spend most of our time in Leigh Woods and the Forest of Dean…
PPS: It seemed appropriate to see this film at the same time as I’ve been reading Paul Mason’s “Postcapitalism” – in which he suggests we might well be about to enter a whole new world of ‘post capitalism’ – where a technological revolution (something of an alternative ‘knowledge’ revolution) will reshape our lives.

grammar schools…

So, the Prime Minister has unveiled plans to allow a “new wave” of existing grammar schools in England to expand, new ones to open and some schools to select pupils by ability.
Such a policy fills me huge anxiety and sadness.
I passed my 11-plus and was one of the “lucky” ones who went to grammar school.
I certainly benefited from an excellent grammar school education and it enabled me to become the first member of our (working class) family ever to go to university.
Whilst my education is a matter of some pride (for me!), it also carries with it an ENORMOUS sense of guilt.
If I was one of let’s say 10% of pupils (it could well have much less) who passed the 11-plus and went on to grammar school, then there were 90% who didn’t. They were labelled as “failures” – and the education system clearly only favoured “successful” pupils. This might sound harsh, but it was absolutely true in the 1960s… and, in my view, would still be the case if grammar school education was extensively reintroduced today. Clearly, there are some pupils who managed to beat the system (my brilliant brother is one of these), but they are the exceptions and do so DESPITE the system… not because of it. I have a long list of old friends who failed to make the grade…
Apparently, Mrs May believes that the ban on new selective schools has been in place too long and has held bright poor children back – “sacrificing children's potential because of dogma and ideology”. She reckons she would ask grammar schools to “take a proportion of pupils from lower-income households”, set up or sponsor a primary feeder school in a deprived area and obtain sponsors for underperforming academies.
Fine!
Well, I COULD write (extensively!) about my reservations on this latest Tory education policy… but, instead, I’ll try to sum up what other people have said about such a policy:
1.    As far back as 2007, David Cameron made clear his opposition to bringing back grammar schools: “parents fundamentally don't want their children divided into sheep and goats at the age of 11."
2.    Mr Willetts (the Tory education spokesman back in 2007) also distanced himself from the traditional Tory belief in academic selection, saying it was "fantasy" to say selection at the age of 11, which takes place in grammar schools, could be fair.
3.    The current chief inspector of schools, Sir Michael Wilshaw, says the idea that poor children would benefit from a return of grammar schools was "tosh" and "nonsense"… and that such a policy would “undo years of progress… My fear is by moving to a grammar and secondary modern system - because, let's face it, that's what well have if you divide at 11 - we will put the clock back, and the progress we have made over the past 10 to 15 years will slow."
4.    Labour's shadow education secretary Angela Rayner said: "By enshrining selection into our education system the prime minister is wilfully ignoring the overwhelming evidence that selection at 11 leads to a more unequal country." She also accused the Education Secretary of “a dangerous misunderstanding of the real issues facing our schools”.
5.    Kevin Courtney, leader of the National Union of Teachers, said opening new grammars was a "regressive move and a distraction from the real problems" of funding pressures and teacher shortages.
6.    Simon Jenkins (Sunday Times, May 2007): “At political meetings at the end of the 1960s, Edward Boyle (Minster of Education from 1962 to 1964) was torn limb from limb by conservative voters, infuriated that their children who had ‘failed’ the eleven-plus were being sent to secondary moderns, along with 70-80% of each age group. They had regarded the grammars as ‘their schools’. The eleven-plus, they said, lost them the 1964 election and would lose them every one until it was abolished.”
7.    Research suggests that just 3% of grammar school entrants are eligible for free school meals, compared to the national average of around 14%.
8.    Labour's shadow education secretary Angela Rayner said: “If you’re going to say, ‘there’s bright kids and there’s kids that are not that bright, and we need to segregate those kids, then say it’.”
9.    Education Secretary Justine Greening has recently been defending potential grammar school policies by quoting (old) research undertaken by the Sutton Trust. This has rather back-fired (according to The Independent newspaper, 8 September 2016): One of the Trust’s recent reports, “Poor Grammar: Entry Into Grammar Schools Disadvantaged Pupils In England”, found a clear correlation between higher incomes and likelihood of entry to grammar schools: the report warned that just 3 per cent pupils getting into grammar schools were from disadvantaged backgrounds. Even controlling for attainment, the research showed disadvantaged pupils were less likely to get places at the schools. Pupils were four times more likely to get into a grammar school if they attended a prep school – attended by six per cent of the population – than if they were on free school meals – which are claimed by 18 per cent of pupils.
10. Former shadow education secretary Lucy Powell said: “All the evidence tells us that, far from giving working-class kids chances, (grammar schools) entrench advantage and have become the preserve of the privately tutored”.
11. The Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, said: “Those who hold up grammar schools as the gold standard are less keen to talk about what happens to those children who, at the age of 11, are told they are not good enough … This rose-tinted view of grammar schools might play well for a nostalgic few on the right of the Tory party but make no mistake about it – they are not the drivers of social mobility they would like to claim”.

Apparently, the government intends to hold a consultation on ways to make new and expanding grammar schools more inclusive - so that places are not limited to families who can "pay for tuition to pass the test". Ah! So, no worries there then… and, OF COURSE, with all the pressures of SAT testing, the children are already perfectly used to pressurised learning!! “Johnnie, you REALLY must do well in this selection test… because, if you don’t, you’re likely to be doomed to failure for the rest of your life”.

If it was bad in the 1960s, it’s a WHOLE lot worse today (just ask ANY parent of ANY pupil at school today)!
I certainly don’t pretend that the existing comprehensive secondary education is working perfectly (don’t get me started on Academies!), but I DO think it’s the most sensible basis for avoiding inequality. I fear that the government’s policy will simply underline the widening gap between those who have and those who don’t.