the guardians…

I went along to the Watershed yesterday afternoon to see Xavier Beauvois’s film “The Guardians” (adapted from Ernest Perochon’s novel), exploring the lives of women who are left behind to work a family farm in rural France during WW1 (a nurse appointment meant I missed the opportunity to see with Moira, Alan and Gareth last week, so it was good to get a belated chance to watch it).
It’s an unhurried, sensitive, beautiful and superbly shot film (cinematographer: Caroline Champetier).
Once the younger men of the community disappear off to war, the women have no option but to take on the task of maintaining the family farm… and they do so with great perseverance and determination (and not a little skill). From the onset, the matriarch (widowed Madame Hortense, wonderfully played by Nathalie Baye) sets about organising things. Her principal worker is daughter Solange (played by Laura Smet) and, subsequently, by a hard-working, cheerful, hired worker, Francine (rather beautifully played by Iris Bry)… who attracts the attention of favourite son, Georges (played by Cyril Descours), and this budding relationship, in turn, enrages a longtime family friend, Margueritte (Mathilde Viseux), who had regarded herself as Georges’s ‘intended’. Probably best if I’ll leave it there… (I would hate to spoil things for you).

The horrors of conflict and their consequences are only referred to quite fleetingly and, instead, the focus is on how the women of this rural community band together to look after the farm, tend cattle and grow food (the ‘old’ men that remain behind seem content to opt out or to concentrate their efforts on producing alcohol!) – and there seems to be an almost grudging resentment from the menfolk of the women’s adaptability and proficiency.

Although the way of life and its seasonal rhythms comes across very powerfully, I think that, for me, it all felt slightly unreal – the sun did seem to shine an awful lot of the time and the main characters in the film were all a little too beautiful!
Nevertheless, I very much enjoyed the film and would highly recommend it.

robert peston’s WTF? (part 2!)…

Well, I’ve now finished Peston’s WTF? book (you might have seen the blog I posted yesterday when I was half way through reading it)… and I really would highly recommend it. Essentially, it’s an eloquent summary of Britain’s problems – set against a backdrop of the Brexit vote and Trump becoming US President. It’s informed, richly argued and brilliantly written… I found it utterly compelling.
In my previous blog post, I focussed on his (and my) concerns for democracy in the light of the influence of social media and with rich tech billionaires “fixing the outcome of an election, by dint of his or her ownership of a self-learning model that gathers and processes information about voters’ preferences and susceptibilities”.
But the book is wide-ranging, also covering such stuff as the “comedy and tragedy” of the 2017 general election; how much of the rest of the world sees “new Britain is horrid Little England”; understanding the disenchantment of large sections of the electorate; the widening gap between rich and poor; low levels of social mobility; education; government investment; politicians; immigration; the marriage of money and technology; productivity; trade unions; robots replacing people; red tape… and much, much more.

In no particular order, here are a few more (rather random) extracts to whet your appetite (believe me, I could have selected pages and pages of them!):

“In 1989, after Margaret Thatcher had done her best to liberate company directors, the typical chief executive of a big company earned twenty times workers’ average pay. Today that ratio is around 130:1. So have executives become 110 times more talented, special and valuable than their workers over the past thirty-odd years, which is what would justify that huge increase in pay differentials? Or have they simply become 110 times more powerful? I think everyone – including the lucky bosses – knows the answer”.

Immediately after the Referendum result in the summer of 2016, when Theresa May was appointed PM, she made a speech in front of 10 Downing Street. Although Peston was dismayed by the result, he felt that “it looked as though Theresa May got it”… (you might remember her speech: “If you’re from an ordinary working-class family, life is much harder than many people in Westminster realise. You have a job, but you don’t always have job security. You have your own home, but you worry about paying the mortgage. You can just about manage, but you worry about the cost of living and getting your kids into good school. If you’re one of those families, if you’re just managing, I want to address you directly” etc etc).

However, Peston was soon shaking his head in disbelief when, in his view, she committed “a quite extraordinary act of self and national harm… perhaps the most wilful act of vandalism by a serving prime minister. That was her declaration at the Tories’ annual conference on 2 October 2016 that she would trigger the EU’s Article 50 process for beginning Brexit negotiations with the rest of the EU by the end of March 2017”. In Peston’s view, this “conference gimmick” imposed an arbitrary and hard deadline and “gave away almost all her negotiating power, not only to the 27 EU countries on the other side of the talks, but also to any critic in the UK parliament or outside parliament with the power to slow up or frustrate the process”.

I remember commenting (others would describe it as ‘ranting’!) on facebook in the months immediately following the Referendum result, that parliament would now be spending all its time arguing about the Brexit implications at the expense of all its other vitally-important business and responsibilities. Peston clearly had similar fears: “As soon as she (Theresa May) established the end of March 2019 as the moment we would again be an independent state, it became impossible for the government to start work in a serious way on fixing the UK’s fundamental flaws – an economy that is weak, unbalanced and distributes what fruits it yields unfairly, a housing crisis, a society ageing faster than the infrastructure of hospitals, care homes and pensions system can cope with – because the political, legal and technical preparations for Brexit were life and death. Everything but Brexit had to wait”.

“Many more people than just the less-educated and the left-behind voted for Brexit, or indeed for Trump in America. Both results are manifestations of a desperate yearning for more control in their lives and for a clearer sense of who they are, especially in the national sense…”.

According to the Bank of England, “a staggering 15 million British jobs are at risk of automation and 80 million American jobs. To put that into context, that would mean 47% of all those currently in work in the UK could see themselves made redundant by Metal Mickey or Max Headroom”.

“What concerns me most is how unfit for purpose our schools are. That is nothing to do with the quality of the teachers and all to do with the lack of imagination in government about curriculum. Our children are being trained with military dedication to do jobs that robots and algorithms can already do… What is profoundly shocking and harmful is that we have a school system almost entirely focused on compelling children to get the best possible grades in exams that themselves measure a very inadequate set of skills”.

“Our schools are teaching the wrong things, they are creating a generation of young workers vulnerable to being made redundant and unnecessary by the machines… With schools ordered by governments to become sausage factories churning out students with the best exam grades, they do not spend enough time helping young people become more creative, better communicators or adapt empathisers”.

Peston thinks last year’s Grenfell tower disaster has highlighted the serious folly of the Cameron government’s policy to reduce the burden on business of rules and regulations deemed to be unnecessary (in 2014, Cameron announced 800 regulations had been abolished or simplified). As Peston puts it: “This Red Tape Challenge, which culminated in the 2015 Deregulation Act, was the corollary of austerity. A priority for the government was to spur the expansion of the private sector as it shrank the size of the public sector, because it feared that failure to do so would have made us even poorer… When the public sector is put under pressure to adopt a culture of assessing regulations to identify those that are unnecessary, when slashing and burning red tape is what generates praise and rewards for officials, the chances are significantly reduced of those officials having the time or inclination to warn that regulations should be increased or toughened in some important areas – such as fire-safety rules for public housing, for example… Nothing could therefore be more important right now than for the war against red tape to slammed into reverse…”.

Peston is also very critical of the idea (during both Thatcher’s and Blair’s time) “that private-sector investment was superior to public-sector investment had been raised to the status of eternal truth”. “Right now, one of the most urgent problems facing the country is the absence of affordable – or, it turns out, safe – housing. One of the more exemplary policies of the 1950s and 1960s was to build council housing on a massive scale, spurring the economy and improving the lives of poor people. After Grenfell… we need to regain that post-war ambition and confidence, to build as we haven’t for decades; financed by a government borrowing without its habitual reluctance on global markets, for projects that will over time improve our economic prospects, as well as uniting a fragmented nation”.

In the first and final chapters of his book, Peston rather touchingly addresses his father (“Dear Dad”), who died in April 2016. He says this: “Dad, when I started conceiving this book, it was in the immediate aftermath of the votes for the UK to leave the European Union and for Trump to become leader of the free world. I was depressed. And I was ashamed, because I had been so comfortable in my cosy, smug North London ghetto that I had not noticed how alienated millions of people, especially poorer people well away from the capital, had become with the economic and political system that suited only a privileged few of us”.

Apologies for the length of this post…

As you might imagine, I could have gone on (and on!)… but I’ll stop now.
I strongly recommend that you read the book – it’s very readable (and angry… and honest… and, at times, funny too).
Bring on the revolution!

robert peston’s WTF?... and ‘influencing’ democracy

I’m half way through Robert Peston’s latest book “WTF?”… and am finding it absolutely fascinating (and hugely illuminating). I’ve got a lot of time for Peston. I think we share similar views (perhaps this why I like him?!) about society, the world, politics(?), the establishment etc. He describes himself as “a fully paid-up member of the community of internationalist liberals – and we are as intolerant of those who challenge our convictions, which we arrogantly take to be universal truths, as the nationalists we hatefully and wrongly see as being small-minded” - I might have written this myself!. In the book, he tries to provide an even-handed analysis of ‘stuff’. It’s passionate, personal, angry, funny… and very readable.

I’ll no doubt quote various bits of his book over the coming weeks(!), but I’ve been particularly intrigued (and not a bit frightened!) by what he wrote in the chapter entitled “Algorithms Win Elections”. I’ve long shaken my head in disbelief when it comes to elections/referendums and democracy… Now I don’t want to bore you(!) but, apart from urging you to buy a copy of his book for yourself, I’m going to quote a number of extracts from this particular chapter (don’t worry, I’m not going to reproduce all 37 pages verbatim !).

In the chapter - regarding the EU Referendum and the notorious ‘additional £350 million every week’ to spend on the NHS’ bus slogan - Peston quickly and effectively discounts it as a ridiculous “charlatan claim”, but goes on to point out that Dominic Cummings, campaign director of Vote Leave, says the £350million claim was: “the most effective argument not only with the crucial swing fifth (of voters) but with almost every demographic. Even with UKIP voters it was level-pegging with immigration. Would we have won without immigration? No. Would we have won without £350m/NHS? All our research and the close result strongly suggests No… The IN campaign realised the effectiveness of this as Andrew Cooper, Ryan Coetze and others said after 23 June, eg: ‘The power of their £350 million a week can’t be overstated’”.

Peston later goes on to say: “There is no doubt, for example, that Vote Leave understood far better than Britain Stronger In (the official campaign to keep the UK in the EU) the opportunity presented by new technologies for gathering information about potential voters and then communicating with them. Looking back on the contest, Vote Leave was deploying a Star Wars  battle cruiser against Wild West gunslingers on the other side. In some ways, it is miraculous that the margin of victory for Leave was not greater”.

“The In campaign’s treasurer, Poland Rudd, is withering about what went wrong with his side’s polling, approach to social media and fundamental message: ‘Craig Oliver ran the campaign on the slogan “Don’t Risk it”’, he says. ‘What we failed to understand was there were too many voters with absolutely nothing to risk’”.

“The star performer for Vote Leave, according to Cummings, was its operations director, Victoria Woodcock… According to Cummings, Woodcock was the ‘most indispensable person in the campaign’… What she did that was so valuable, for Cummings, was manage the creation of new ‘canvassing software’… The point, according to Cummings, was to suck in and process data about voters ‘from social media, online advertising, websites, apps, canvassing, direct mail, polls, online fundraising, activist feedback and… a new way to do polling’… There is no ambiguity about the importance of social media to Vote Leave”.

(After reference to various betting markets and hedge funds that benefited from the referendum result): “The fundamental point, relevant here, is that our shaky confidence that democracy yields equal benefits for all is tested when very wealthy people both finance political campaigns and become enriched when those campaigns succeed. It creates the impression – perhaps mistaken, but hard to dispel – that the system is rigged in favour of the rich and powerful”.

“In a future not very far away – and it may be as soon as the next election – campaigns could be won and lost in the way that hedge funds such as the multi-billionaire Jim Simons’s Renaissance Technologies have beaten the market for years, with data gathering and self-learning algorithms. Cummings and Vote Leave got close with the way they used their VICS program and the expertise of AggregataIQ to gather information about voters and then targeted their marketing in a more laser-like way. A party’s values and messages matter. But in today’s digital babel, they are probably less important than how the message is presented and to whom it is communicated”.

“What we need, and urgently, is a proper public debate about where to draw the new line in this social-media and online age between complete freedom of expression and rules that do not deliver unfair political advantage to technologically savvy plutocrats. This is a pressing question, not just for the conduct of elections and referendums but also for the everyday discourse that takes place online…”.

“Today’s Big Brother is Big Data. If we don’t give our political and data regulators powers fit for the Facebook age, a deep-pocketed tech billionaire will fix the outcome of an election, by dint of his or her ownership of a self-learning model that gathers and processes information about voters’ preferences and susceptibilities”.

Of course, you probably already knew all about this (yes, I had a very limited understanding… but the more I think and learn about it, the more worried I become!).

Be afraid. Be very afraid. Big Brother IS watching.
But, hey, read the book. It’s quite brilliant.

the children act…

I went along to the Watershed again this afternoon (twice in four days!) to see Richard Eyre’s “The Children Act”, based on Ian McEwan’s novel of the same name. I’d read (and enjoyed) the book some three years ago. Emma Thompson plays the part of a widely-acclaimed judge who is married to her work (and her marriage is correspondingly suffering - much to the frustration of her husband, played by Stanley Tucci). A 17-year old boy with leukaemia (played by Fionn Whitehead) needs a life-saving blood transfusion – but it’s against his Jehovah’s Witness beliefs. As the boy is just short of adulthood, the judge is asked to determine the case...
It’s a beautifully-constructed, well-paced, intricate, painful and sensitive story which encompasses relationships, legal argument, moral responsibility and music (amongst other things!)… and I thought the music was wonderfully effective (something you can’t quite get from the book). Indeed, Thompson reveals her wide-ranging talents by also playing the piano and singing!
All the principal actors were excellent, but I thought Emma Thompson was quite brilliant.
A rather beautiful, powerful film.
Highly recommended.

PS: The cinema was virtually full this afternoon... with perhaps 90% 'elderly' women, 5% 'elderly' men and 5% 'others'!

under the tree...

I went along to the Watershed this afternoon to Hafsteinn Gunnar Sigurdsson’s film “Under The Tree”. It’s a black comedy (I’m trying to think of an alternative description, but failing miserably!) about a dispute between neighbours, which spirals out of control. It starts with a tree completely overshadowing a neighbouring garden - but then progresses to bickering couples, mooning garden gnomes, disappearing pets… and a chainsaw (amongst other things)! It’s a very astute (and, at times, quite hilarious) observation of how people might react to situations that affect their everyday suburban lives and how relatively minor disputes can escalate into painful nightmares.
Battle lines are drawn; reprisals mysteriously happen; entrenchment intensifies…

The good thing (as far as I was concerned) was that, in their various ways, all the main protagonists were not particularly nice people (even if I did find myself ‘caring’ for them) – they each had their faults and issues – and so I felt able to sit back and watch things develop without feeling unduly anxious regarding the outcome or urging one side to emerge victorious. I could go on, but don’t want to give away too much!

The film has clearly thrown new light on our own ‘neighbour issues’ (with Japanese Knotweed spreading into our garden from next door), but…
Despite its somewhat farcical nature, I very much enjoyed the film (and I predicted the concluding images!)… it reminded me, in some ways, of the last Icelandic film I’d seen, “Rams”, which was also about communication (or lack of) between neighbours.

august 2018 books...

A Recipe For Sorcery (Vanessa Kisuule): Earlier this year, Vanessa became Bristol’s new city poet. She’s also an occasional, but very enthusiastic and talented, member of our weekly Drawing Group. She and I have enjoyed coffee/red wine together (mine was the red wine, obviously!) and, believe me, she’s a pretty amazing woman. Over recent years, I’ve found myself reading more and more poetry (not something I necessarily find easy to appreciate) and have found reading Vanessa’s latest book of poetry remarkable, captivating and challenging. She’s also a performance poet and, after watching her ‘perform’ via YouTube, she really is rather spellbinding. But, hey, she’s a young, passionate, black woman who essentially writes about women and I’m just an old, out-of-touch, white bloke! Well, strange as it might seem, I really enjoyed this collection of her poems – incredibly honest and sexually explicit (uncomfortably so on occasions), frank, frequently funny and always thought-provoking. She has a wonderful way with language… I found myself reading every poem out loud (not quite with the same virtuosity as Vanessa, but it’s a start!). Frequently, there were times when I would have liked to ask her about the background to a particular poem. I think she’s a bit special.  
Notes On A Nervous Planet (Matt Haig): Haig is perhaps (or at least was) best known for his children’s books and adult fiction. Unwittingly, following his successful ‘Reasons for Staying Alive’ book (about his own experiences of anxiety and depression), I suspect he will gain a reputation as one of a small band of men who can write about emotions? Full of very sensible stuff. This is the first of Haig’s books I’ve read and so my knee-jerk reactions to it might be a little harsh and/or unfair. However, although I found the book both interesting and informative, I also felt that, at times, Haig had a found a rather glib way of writing a popular book and making a little easy money (yes, I know, that’s rather harsh!)… and that, actually I could have very easily written whole swathes of the book myself (yeh, right!)... I frequently found myself thinking “yes, but he’s only stating the blooming obvious”(!). Yes (as one tiny example), learning to restrict time on the internet or on your smart phone makes absolute sense… a couple of years ago, I changed my blackberry phone for an incredibly basic phone (with ancient text technology etc). I now use my phone simply to make and receive calls or somewhat laborious texts… I don’t bother with emails or the internet. I’ve found the whole experience both refreshing and liberating. But it’s NOT rocket science (and I also go for walks and stare at the sky… as he also suggests!)(and he didn’t even mention sketching, but he should have done). However, hats off to him when it comes to his writing about anxiety, depression and mental health.
A Conspiracy Of Friends (Alexander McCall Smith): I’ve read a number of Smith’s novels, but this is the first of his ‘Corduroy Mansions’ series I’ve read (in fact, I now realise that it’s the third book in the series). The stories were originally serialised online. Essentially, they’re about the lives of the inhabitants of a large three-story (plus basement) house in Pimlico, London. It’s all pretty mundane, undemanding, unexceptional stuff and yet Smith has the ability to conjure up pictures of beautifully observed characters and gentle, amusing normality. Easy, light, enjoyable holiday reading.
Talking To My Daughter About The Economy (Yanis Varoufakis): This is the second book on capitalism I’ve read in the past couple of months (scary!). Very different to Ken Barnes’s “Redeeming Capitalism” but just as effective – perhaps even more so? As you probably recall, Varoufakis became the Greek finance minister in 2015 and this book is a ‘brief history of capitalism’ but, as the title suggests, it’s addressed directly to his 13 year-old daughter in answer to her question “why is there so much inequality?”. He wrote it in 9 days and it’s the only book he’s ever written ‘without any footnotes, references or the paraphernalia of academic or political books’. And it’s pretty brilliant. Somewhat predictably, he’s massively critical of the banks (and rightly so in my view!), but he does so with the authority of someone who has, for many years, been a professor of economics in Britain, Australia and the USA (although he acknowledges that the reason he became an economist was because he refused to “leave it to the experts”). It’s a straightforward, no nonsense book - one reviewer described it as equipping “his readers with the beginnings of a new language, and punctures myth after myth” – it’s articulate, intelligent and talks a huge amount of sense. I was enormously impressed.
Slade House (David Mitchell): This apparently first started as a short story on Twitter. The story focuses on a building, Slade House… “on one side of a high wall lies a narrow, dank alley; on the other, a sunlit garden; and between them, a small black iron door”. So begins a mysterious, magical adventure… starting in 1979, and progressing to the present day at nine-year intervals, it tells five intriguing, dark stories. It mixes horror, humour, suspense and deception… with extraordinary imagination and cleverness. I was hooked!

I’d like UK politics to be far less tribal, please…

Several years ago, I remember listening to four (I think) ‘senior’ politicians on the radio talking about their political lives (sadly, I can no longer recall their names)… about issues of the day; about their regrets; about their frustrations; and about stuff they’d been proud to have been involved in. A General Election was due, but each of the politicians in question had decided it was time they ‘stepped down’.
The politicians were from different parties and I can clearly remember listening to the programme in absolute awe.
Each of them spoke with quiet authority and, crucially, from their own personal perspectives… they were generous to each other; they acknowledged each others’ point of view; and, in the course of the discussion, there were several times when they were able to agree various compromise options to hugely difficult issues.
The discussion was relaxed, authoritative, intelligent and good-humoured. There was a wonderful spirit of ‘if-only-we-could-have-set-aside-our-respective-party-dogmas-we-might-have-achieved-something’. It was quite, quite brilliant… without doubt, one of the most impressive political ‘debates’ I’ve ever experienced. Above all, it all seemed SO refreshing and hopeful.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve become HUGELY disillusioned with the whole world of politics here in the UK (yes, I’d be the first to acknowledge that one or two other western democracies have similar issues… mentioning no names!).

I’d also be happy to acknowledge that we are fortune to have some very gifted politicians in the UK… I could probably come up with a list of more than 50 (if only I could actually remember some of their names!) whose opinions, integrity and principles I particularly respected… and there are obviously many more about whom I know very little(!).
It’ll probably never happen, but I long for a time when the UK might be governed by a coalition of sensible, sensitive, gifted people (not necessarily those whose political views reflect my own!) and an end to the appalling, embarrassing, bah-humbug, them-and-us, politics that we witness on a weekly basis at Prime Minister’s Questions.
Sadly, with party politics seemingly dominating everything else, we have the continuing, farcical Brexit ‘debate’ which has totally divided the Tory party (not to mention the nation) whilst, at the same time, we have a largely ineffective Labour opposition party unable to bring the government to account on a whole range of issues - at a time when the government is regularly ‘failing’. I'd like a world where the politicians who represent us endeavour to make decisions on a 'taking-everything-on-its-merits' basis, rather than how Party Whips instruct them to vote.

So, if it’s ok with you, I’d like the following politicians to get together and offer themselves to the country as the core of an alternative government (please feel free to add your own favourites – as long as they don’t include Rees-Mogg, Gove and Johnson - or even delete some of mine!): Caroline Lucas; Dominic Grieve; Harriet Harman; Chuka Umunna; Yvette Cooper; David Lammy; Luciana Burger; Mhairi Black; Layla Moran; Andrew Mitchell; Anna Soubry, Ben Bradshaw and Tom Brake for starters?

july-august 2018 books...

Runaway (Peter May): Published in 2015, the story tells of five teenage friends who run away to London from Glasgow 50 years ago in search of a music career. Within a year, three have returned, damaged. Fifty years on, the three friends, now in their sixties, journey back to London to finally confront a dark truth from their past. May is a brilliant storyteller (apparently, he too ran away to London in his youth after being expelled from school) and has become a favourite novelist of mine over recent years. It’s a gripping story, but it was also a reminder of my own life in the ‘swinging sixties’ (although mine wasn’t quite as nerve-wracking or exciting  as theirs!) and the reflections of a grandfather about his regrets and missed opportunities… but also about the faint pride in some of the things he had achieved. I very much enjoyed the book.
The Handmaiden’s Tale (Margaret Atwood): Yes, I know I’ve come very late to read this (and, no, I haven’t watched any of the television episodes… so far). First published in 1985(!), it’s a quite brilliant, vivid and terrifying novel, set in a near-future New England, of a totalitarian state which has overthrown the US government. As you’re probably already aware, it explores themes of suppressed women in a patriarchal society and the various means by which these women attempt to gain individualism and independence. The Handmaids are forced to provide children by proxy for infertile women of a higher social status, the wives of ‘Commanders’. Not only is the book scary, but it’s also sobering to think that it’s already more than 30 years old. At the time of its publication, it must have been somewhat laughable to think that anything approaching such a regime might be considered possible – certainly in the western world. And yet, having been on the recent anti-Trump march (and hearing/reading his various knee-jerk comments/decisions) and seeing a number of women dressed in their Handmaid’s ‘uniform’, you begin to wonder. A stunning book with a very important message… by a brilliantly-gifted writer.
Iona Of My Heart (Neil Paynter): This is a book of four months’ daily readings which reflect the concerns of the Iona Community. Editor Paynter called for contributions and it was lovely to see that two volunteer friends (Noelia Mendoza and Lee Ann Monat) from my time on the island in 2012 contributed to the book (I now regret not getting round to submitting something myself!). ‘Iona of my Heart’ is an apt title (certainly for me anyway) and I found that the daily readings gave me a daily rhythm of reflection and contemplation in the same way that the daily liturgies did during my two months on the island. 
The House Of Mirth (Edith Wharton): This novel, published in 1905, tells the story of a beautiful, impoverished, 29 year-old woman in New York. She’s a socially adept, intelligent and attractive young woman but her dependence on high society is her Achilles heel. Fashioned for a life of luxury and ease, she conducts herself as if she is entitled to such a life, despite being unable to afford it, and she scorns those who lead alternative lifestyles. Her father loses his fortune and she becomes increasingly desperate to find herself a husband to support her - high society life and attending regular house parties at which she endeavours to retain the superficial endorsement of the ‘movers and the shapers’ of social taste. Alas, it was not to be and she becomes vulnerable to gossip and slander. She’d grown up in a world of high social status where it seems that her only purpose was to secure a ‘leisure-class marriage’…
Strangely, I found that reading it so soon after finishing ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’, there were some haunting parallels between the two stories (well, for me anyway)… worlds dominated by male status and power – either reducing female roles to mere vehicles for reproduction or providing them with the means to enjoy a privileged existence (without status, power and wealth, a man no longer counted: “he had become extinct when he ceased to fulfil his purpose”). Wharton writes beautifully; she has a wonderful, frequently very humorous, ‘turn of phrase’. It’s a frank and poignant novel about New York society at the beginning of the 20^th century and I very much enjoyed it. 
Reservoir 13 (Jon McGregor): I love McGregor’s books… and I really loved this one. A teenage girl on holiday goes missing in the hills; villagers are called up to join the search; news reporters descend on normally quiet village in the heart of England. The search continues for days, months… and years, as does rural life. The novel takes us on a thirteen year, teasing journey as we follow the inhabitants and activities of ongoing village life – and, all the time, asking ourselves if so-and-so might be the guilty party? Somewhat predictably, given that there must be more than three dozen(?) people involved, I kept needing to . on the particular characters (who is she/he married to? who’s daughter/son is this? what’s the relationship between x and y? etc etc). But brilliant writing - capturing the year-round rhythm of life and individuals in a rural community… and a truly haunting, enthralling story.