The Village Of Eight Graves (Seishi Yokomizo): This was my third Yokomizo murder mystery (first published in 1971)… and probably my favourite of the three. As always, the plot is quite complicated (but clever and intriguing) – with more murders than ‘Midsomer Murders’ – and involves a young man arriving in hamlet nestling in the mountains of Japan (named ‘Eight Graves’ after a centuries-old massacre) to claim a mysterious inheritance. There are a series of gruesome poisonings but, with the help of the famous Kosuke Kindaichi (the book’s equivalent of Christie’s Poirot), the mystery is eventually solved (despite all the various red herrings and dubious alibis. It’s typical, classic, crime fiction with all the dots duly joined up by way of explanation at the end of the book.
Thursday, April 21, 2022
march-april 2022 books…
Tuesday, April 19, 2022
response to partygate excuses…
Keir Starmer is not my idea of a hugely effective Leader of the Opposition…
However, I think his response to Mr Johnson’s ‘apology’ this afternoon is probably his most powerful speech in the Commons to date.
This is what he said:
“What a joke. Even now as the latest
mealy-mouthed apology stumbles out of one side of his mouth, a new set of
deflections and distortions pour from the other.
But the damage is already done.
The public have made up their mind.
They don’t believe a word the Prime
Minister says.
They know what he is.
As ever with this Prime Minister those
close to him find themselves ruined and the institutions he vows to protect
damaged.
Good ministers forced to walk away from
public service.
The Chancellor’s career up in flames.
And the Leader of the Scottish
Conservatives rendered pathetic.
For all those unfamiliar with this
Prime Minister’s career.
This isn’t some fixable glitch in the
system.
It’s the whole point.
It’s what he does.
It’s who he is.
He knows he’s dishonest and incapable
of changing.
So he drags everybody else down with
him.
The more people debase themselves,
parroting his absurd defences, the more the public will believe all politicians
are the same.
All as bad as each other.
And that suits this Prime Minister just
fine.
Some members opposite seem oblivious to
the Prime Minister’s game.
Some know what he’s up to but are too
weak to act.
But others are gleefully playing the
part the Prime Minister cast for them.
A minister on the radio this morning
saying it’s the same as a speeding ticket.
No it’s not.
No one has ever broken down in tears
because they couldn’t drive faster than 20mph outside a school.
Don’t insult the public with this
nonsense.
But Mr Speaker, as it happens the last
Minister who got a speeding ticket and then lied about it ended up in prison
and I know because I prosecuted him.
And last week we were treated to a
grotesque spectacle.
One of the Prime Minister’s loyal
supporters accusing teachers and nurses of drinking in the staff room through
lockdown.
Members opposite can associate
themselves with that if they want.
But those of us who take pride in our
NHS workers, our teachers and every other key worker who got us through those
dark days will never forget their contempt.
Plenty didn’t agree with every rule the
Prime Minister wrote.
But they followed them nonetheless
because in this country we respect others, we put the greater good above narrow
self-interest and we understand that the rules apply to all of us.
This morning, I spoke to John Robinson,
a constituent for the Member for Lichfield, I want to tell his story.
When his wife died of Covid, John and
his family obeyed the Prime Minister’s rules.
He didn’t see her in hospital, he
didn’t hold her hand as she died.
Their daughters and grandchildren drove
100 miles up the motorway, clutching a letter from the funeral director in case
they were questioned by the police.
They didn’t have a service in the
church, John’s son-in-law stayed away because he would have been the forbidden
seventh mourner.
Doesn’t the Prime Minister realise that
John would have given the world to hold his dying wife’s hand, even if it was
just for nine minutes?
But he didn’t.
Because he followed the Prime
Minister’s rules.
Rules that we now know the Prime
Minister blithely, repeatedly and deliberately ignored.
After months of insulting excuses,
today’s half-hearted apology will never be enough for John Robinson.
If the Prime Minister had any respect
for John and the millions like him who sacrificed everything to follow the
rules he’d resign.
But he won’t.
Because he doesn’t respect John.
He doesn’t respect the sacrifice of the
British public.
He is a man without shame.
Looking past the Member for Lichfield
and the nodding dogs in the cabinet.
There are many decent, honourable
members on the benches opposite.
Who do respect John Robinson.
Who do respect the British public.
They know the damage the Prime Minister
is doing.
They know things can’t go on as they
are.
And they know it is their
responsibility to bring an end to this shameful chapter.
Today I urge them once again.
Don’t follow in the slipstream of an
out of touch, out of control Prime Minister.
Put their conscience first, put their
country first, put John Robinson first and remove the Prime Minister from
office.
Bring decency, honesty and integrity
back into our politics.
And stop the denigration of everything
that this country stands for”.
Sunday, March 27, 2022
march 2022 books…
The Inugami Curse (Seishi Yokomizo): This is the second Yokomizo detective mystery I’ve read. First published in 1972, the story is set in 1940s Japan and the wealthy head of the Inugami Clan has died and his family eagerly await the reading of his will. Strange details emerge about forbidden liaisons, monstrous cruelty and hidden identities which, in turn, lead to a series of bizarre and gruesome murders. Yokomizo’s notorious detective Kindaichi tries to unravel matters… The book is clearly one of those ‘Golden Age of Classic Crime Fiction’ mysteries (with Kindaichi acting the equivalent role of a sort of Hercule Poirot character) – ridiculously intricate, frequently funny but far-fetched plot (albeit a clever one) – culminating in the customary detailed explanation of what had taken place (again, think Agatha Christie novels!). Entertaining and enjoyable.
Friday, March 25, 2022
the worst person in the world…
Renate Reinsve is my new favourite actor!
I went along to the Watershed this afternoon to see Norwegian director Joachim Trier’s latest film “The Worst Person in the World”.
Despite the fact that Reinsve plays a young woman (Julie) in her late 20s who dumps two men, cheats on and lies to the second, and is fearful of the irreversibility of life decisions, it’s a powerfully life-affirming film.
To say that Julie doesn’t know what she wants to do with her life is something of an understatement – she starts off as a medical student, changes course to psychology and then decides she wants to go into photography. Her first featured relationship is with a comic-book artist - who’s gaining quite reputation for himself (while she’s still working in a bookshop to help pay her way), but ‘discovers’ Man no.2 (who works in a cafe) when she leaves Man no.1’s launch party early. Hey, it’s complicated… but sometimes life’s like that!
The Guardian’s film critic Peter Bradshaw gave the film a 5-star review and I think the final paragraph of his review absolutely sums things up perfectly: “This film is sweet and gentle and funny, in ways that are undoubtedly conventional but also very real. It’s the kind of film we’ve all seen done so badly that it’s an unexpected treat to see it done well and to realise that its themes are very important: who do you fall in love with? Who is ‘the one’? When do you realise that you are just settling? Reinsve’s performance is just so good. A star is born”.
I thought it was a brilliant film (I’m now a little in love with Renate Reinsve)(ok, a lot!)… but then I think everyone in today’s cinema audience came away thinking the same.
I REALLY think you should see it for yourself. Despite having seen some wonderful movies this year, I think this could be my film of the year!!
Wednesday, March 23, 2022
isn’t history (and technology) wonderful?
When we
were living in Southville, I discovered the wonderful ‘Know Your Place Bristol’
website, which gave access to a number of digital heritage maps
indicating how places had changed over the years.
Well yesterday, given that we
now live in a very different part of the city, I decided to re-visit the
website.
It proved to be absolutely fascinating.
The website
enables you to look at various maps of the city spanning a number of years
(1746-2019) but, crucially, allows you to compare areas directly through the
use of main maps and comparison maps at the same time via linked ‘overlays’ (I’m
not explaining this very well – it’s best just to explore the website itself).
With the
cathedral as one of our neighbours (just 100m down the road), it wasn’t
all that surprising that a trawl through the maps would throw up lots of
interesting details:
The
cathedral came into being 1542; it was formerly St Augustine’s Abbey (church
and monastery, founded in 1140) until its dissolution.
It turns
out that our apartment block stands on the site of the Bishop’s Park – located alongside
the Bishop’s Palace. The palace was damaged by fire in the Bristol Riots of
1831 (together with Queen Square and three prisons!); it was subsequently again
attacked by rioters in 1851 – and this time was burnt to the ground (see
1746-1803 map)(top). Other adjacent buildings include the Abbey House (c1150-60, remodelled
C17 and rebuilt in the 1950s); the former Deanery (early C17, altered C18); and
Bristol Cathedral School (possibly C12 origin and re-founded in 1542 by Henry
VIII).
The
1844-1888 map (bottom) shows Deanery Road (other maps suggest it was created at some time between
1855-1874), together with a tramway link from the floating harbour to Hotwells –
running immediately adjacent the north wall of the cathedral. Interesting also to
note the extensive loss of houses and changed street patterns (much of College
Street disappeared, together with Brandon Street, Bellington Lane and Cross
Street, for example).
Lots of
other interesting stuff, including (from the 1746-1803 map) the marshland
(Cannon’s Marsh) and Rope Walk immediately to the south of the Bishop’s Park;
the Frome River with its navigable limits extending to Quay Street (just a
little beyond Saint Stephen’s Church); the appearance of Park Street on the
1828 map (in place of Bullock’s Park)… oh, and so much more.
I suspect I’ll be returning to city
history records again at various times over the coming months. A wonderful resource.
Photo: As you’re probably well aware, I’m
not very good when it comes to technology(!), so the accompanying images are
merely my ‘marked up’ photographs taken from my laptop (I didn’t understand the
‘screenshot’ instructions!).
Note: ‘Know Your Place’ heritage websites also extend as far as London, Birmingham, Wales, Cornwall, South
Gloucestershire and North Somerset.
PS: Click on the images to enlarge.
Saturday, March 12, 2022
putin...
For the vast majority of people, recent events have secured Putin’s place as one of the world’s unpopular and most feared individuals.
People (world leaders, politicians, journalists and alike) have expressed shock and surprise at what’s happening in Ukraine and yet, as a documentary first shown on the BBC in March 2018 seems to show, it was only a matter of time.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09vb7m3/putin-the-new-tsar
Although I was vaguely aware of most of
the events highlighted in documentary, I freely admit that I had largely swept such
issues aside (yes, I know most of us have had ‘our fill’ of sickening
images of the Russian army bombarding Ukraine). BUT I really would recommend
that you watch the documentary in an effort to put things into context… and to
underline that we shouldn’t have been surprised by Putin’s actions.
Despite his
lowly KGB colonel credentials, Putin became President in May 2000. Between
2000-2004, Putin set about the reconstruction of the impoverished condition of
the country - apparently (according to
Wikipedia) winning a power-struggle with the Russian oligarchs, reaching a
'grand bargain' with them, which allowed the oligarchs to maintain most of
their powers, in exchange for their explicit support for Putin's government (and,
it seems, direct financial compensation/contributions/back-handers). Indeed,
according to the documentary,
Putin was regarded as “the world’s richest man” – in 2015, outspoken critic Boris
Nemtsov circulated pamphlets pointing out that Putin’s wealth included 58 jets,
2 yachts and a summer palace (Nemtsov was assassinated soon after). Corruption
and institutionalised corruption in the country is now considered rife.
In 2008,
there was a crisis in Georgia (with Russian tanks sent to the country and a
5-day war resulting); in 2014, there were several Russian military incursions
into Ukraine and, as a result of a Russian-organised, widely-criticised referendum,
Crimea (then part of Ukrainian territory) was annexed to join Russia.
In the
documentary, Sergei Pugachev (who helped Putin come to power) described Putin
as a “weak man… an envious and greedy man… and he’s a man who always lies”. Nemtsov
described Putin’s attitudes demonstrated the “extreme narcissism of the emperor”.
Former Foreign Secretary, William Hague, maintained that Putin “has invented
new kinds of warfare which Western countries are still struggling to come to
terms with… “with its full spectrum capability”.
But, for
me, the most telling words of the documentary came from Gary Kasparov (former
World Chess Champion and who, in 2008, had announced his intention to run as a
candidate in that year's Russian presidential race - but, after encountering
logistical problems in his campaign, for which he blamed "official
obstruction", he withdrew).
Kasparov said: “It’s not IF Putin would
attack, it’s only when and where”.
Sobering and telling words from four
years ago.
Friday, March 04, 2022
ali and ava…
I went to the Watershed (again!) this afternoon to see director Clio Barnard’s film “Ali and Ava” – starring the rather brilliant actors Claire Rushbrooke and Adeel Akhtar in the title roles. It’s a modern love story set in Bradford over the course of a month.
Ava is a single grandmother (five times over) whose life is her family. She lives in a rough part of the city, but oozes endless patience and tenderness at home and in her teaching assistant job in a primary school – despite the lingering damage caused by a violent, alcoholic ex-husband (who died the previous year). In a much nicer part of Bradford, Ali shares a home with his wife, but is a lonely figure as their marriage has effectively ended; they carry on for the sake of Ali’s tight-knit British-Pakistani family (who live next door), but occupy separate bedrooms.
It’s a tough, and yet hugely joyful, drama of love conquering the divisions of race and prejudice; middle age disillusionment; the challenges of parenthood and grandparenthood; and the tensions of class. The film creates a wonderful, effortless chemistry through the use of music, brilliant acting (and story-telling) and sheer charm.
Friday, February 25, 2022
the duke…
Roger Mitchell’s film ‘The Duke’ opened this afternoon at the Watershed and Moira+I attended the first showing of its ‘run’. Given the awful events in Ukraine, I felt a little guilty booking the tickets - because I did so knowing full well that the film would bring a smile to our faces at a time when so many others were suffering.
But, in the end, I’m very glad we did.
Somehow, watching a feel-good film about someone operating with the best of motives and for the benefit of others was a reminder that, even at the worst of times, there are bright pin-pricks of light.
The film is based on the true story of Kempton Bunton (quite brilliantly played by Jim Broadbent), a Newcastle cab driver who in 1965 appeared at the Old Bailey for stealing Goya’s portrait of the Duke of Wellington from London’s National Gallery.
Bunton writes dozens of unpublished novels and unproduced plays (emotionally driven by the tragic death of his daughter) and is briefly imprisoned for refusing to pay for his TV licence on the grounds that he has removed the cathode that allows his set to receive the BBC. He’s something of a working-class eccentric – frequently protesting at the government’s misuse of taxpayers’ money, standing up for workers’ rights and the like. The excellent Helen Mirren plays his exasperated, but loving, wife Dorothy.
Bunton ends up making a trip to London to petition for pensioners to be given free TV licences – a trip which ends up taking him to the National Gallery, where they’ve just spent £140,000 of public money to secure Goya’s portrait of the Duke of Wellington (which Kempton describes as being “some half-baked portrait by a Spanish drunk” and argues that the cash would have been better spent providing free TV licences for all the UK’s old age pensioners. Bunton is one of those stubborn, eccentric individualists – at times hugely irritating, but also someone with admirable determination and energy (and with the best of motives).
I loved this film. I loved the story. I loved the characters and I loved the acting. Yes, it might have been over-sentimentalised at times… but it gave me a very warm feeling inside and made me smile – something we all need in these difficult and testing times.
You have to see it.
Wednesday, February 23, 2022
february books...
Manifesto (Bernardine Evaristo): This is an intimate and fearless account of her life and career. Her London childhood was steeped in racism (her father was black, her mother white) from neighbours, priests and even some white members of her own family. The book describes how she discovered the arts through her local youth theatre; about her many romantic partners, both male and female (some quite horrible!); about finding her soulmate; about discovering her roots; and, crucially, about her determination and tenacity to succeed in becoming a successful writer. She’s a pretty amazing lady – who is now a Professor of Creative Writing at Brunel University. Lucky students. Fascinating book.
Thursday, February 17, 2022
the souvenir: part 2…
I went along to the Watershed this afternoon to see director Joanna Hogg’s highly autobiographical study of a young film-maker in “The Souvenir: Part 2” - featuring the excellent Honor Swinton (Julie) in the lead role and Tida Swinton (her real-life mother) as her mother.
I felt something of a fraud because I hadn’t seen Part 1, but hey ho!
The film starts in the aftermath of Julie’s relationship with the heroin-addicted Anthony (played by Tom Burke), from the 2019 ‘Souvenir’ film, which leaves Julie struggling to make sense of their former life together, with all its mysteries and issues.
Julie is an ambitious film student entering an intoxicating world of unpredictable romantic entanglements in 1980s London. She faces the prospect of having to make her film-school graduation project while still reeling from the fallout of her doomed relationship and decides to channel her personal experiences into a free-form “memorial” to Anthony - that both baffles and irritates her tutors. For me, it brought back memories of student life (architecture not film-making, I hasten to add!) and the risky business, as a naïve and inexperienced student, of ‘ignoring’ the tutors’ opinions and directions (or at least bending interpretations!).
As Julie’s life and studies progress (and as she reflects on/recovers from her ‘Anthony’ experiences), we see her getting tougher, arguing for the camera positions she wants from her student colleagues, having to let down actor friends who had assumed she was going to cast them in her film… but also going into therapy to deal with her anxiety and loneliness.
The film ends (of course) with her tutors recognising her graduation piece and her talent at a celebratory showing of Julie’s work. It’s something of a creative coming of age story. Powerful and endearing. I rather loved it.
Wednesday, February 16, 2022
“you are number 395 in the queue…”
There’s much frustration with the UK government at the present time (understatement).
Two key matters (but, hey, there are MANY more besides… cost of living, energy prices, world peace etc etc) involve a) the so-called ‘Partygate’ issues (and the delays to the publication of Sue Grey’s Report, due to the Met Police’s initial reluctance to undertake their own investigations) and b) the formal Inquiry into the Covid-19 Pandemic.
The government’s handling of the Covid-19 pandemic has been heavily and widely criticised by health officials, politicians, journalists and the general public. Last May, the Prime Minister announced that there would be a formal Inquiry into Covid-19 pandemic… BUT, frustratingly, that this wouldn’t start unit “Spring 2022”.
Meanwhile, back in October 2021, Parliament’s Health and Social Care Committee and the Science and Technology Committee (comprising MPs from all parties) issued a 150-page document, ‘Coronavirus: Lessons learned to date’ (predominantly focussing on the response to the pandemic in England). They described it as “the worst public health failure ever” – with the government initially trying to manage the situation by ‘herd immunity’; delaying introduction of the first lockdown, costing thousands of lives; failing to focus on those who had died and blaming problems with laptops etc (which the committee described as “laughable”); etc etc.
In December 2021, an inquiry set up by the campaign group ‘Keep our NHS Public’ concluded that the UK government’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic was “grossly negligent” and amounted to misconduct in public office. Key findings included that the depleted state of the NHS and other public services before the pandemic was a determining factor in poor outcomes. Additionally, the government was poorly prepared and responded too slowly, adopting an incorrect strategy leading to a loss of life and growing mistrust in its advice. Furthermore, a consistent failure of government policies to reduce inequalities put the most vulnerable at high risk of illness and death from COVID-19.
The formal Inquiry announced by Mr Johnson last May will be chaired by Baroness Heather Hallett. No start date has yet been announced – apart from “Spring 2022”. Additional panel members were to be appointed in the new year to “make sure the Inquiry has access to the full range of expertise needed to complete its important work” (as yet no names have been announced). The Prime Minister would be consulting Baroness Hallett and ministers from the devolved administrations on the terms of reference for the Inquiry and these would be published in draft in the new year (as yet no terms of reference have been published).
There is no timeframe/deadline for the Inquiry. You might recall the Chilcott Inquiry into the Iraq War… with Hearings undertaken Nov 2009-Feb 2011 and the Report published in July 2016!
Frustratingly, one can image that Mr Johnson and fellow members of his government will be long since gone by the time any Inquiry Report is published (and, by then, they’ll no doubt have 'retired' from Westminster and be ‘earning’ fat salaries serving on the Boards of influential companies)… and the then government will no doubt issue pathetic statements about “lessons having been learnt” and everything will be swept under the carpet.
Sunday, February 13, 2022
ongoing spiritual wilderness…
This is going to be a strange blogpost!
I took communion for the first time today in nearly two years. That must seem strange for someone like me who calls himself a Christian… but lockdown has made me feel somewhat vulnerable in such ‘communal’ situations.
As some of my friends are aware, I’ve been struggling with my faith over recent years and frequently find myself at odds (or at least finding it difficult) to take some of the talks/sermons in my stride.
Today was a
case in point (and stop reading here if this isn’t for you). The New Testament
reading was taken from Paul’s letter to the Corinthians (Cor1 15: 12-20) and it
dealt with the subject of resurrection. Now, while I do have some doubts from
time to time about the resurrection account in the Bible, I’m basically a
‘believer’. What I struggle much more with is the business of our own personal
resurrections. I have to say that I, for one, don’t believe in life after
death… in the literal sense (I might change my mind, in due course, as I
approach my dotage!).
But this
morning’s Bible text included the following (taken from the NIV version of the
Bible): “For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either”
(verse 16) and “Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are
baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people
baptized for them?” (verse 29) - and this message was duly endorsed/repeated in
the morning’s talk/sermon.
So, on this basis, can I REALLY call
myself a Christian?
Well, no
doubt there will be many who would answer “no” but, interestingly, the BBC
commissioned a survey in 2017 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39153121) and found that a quarter of people
who describe themselves as Christians in Great Britain do not believe in the
resurrection of Jesus.
The survey
also suggested that:
·
17%
of all people believe the Bible version word-for-word (not me)
So, I’m not alone.
I
appreciate that I could be accused (with some justification) that I
‘cherry-pick’ what I believe in. But what I find really difficult is being
‘told’ by some leaders of our church communities what my faith should consist
of – with, apparently, no room for doubt. Effectively, the message seems to be:
“this is what the Bible says, so it must be true (or pretty close)… and if
you’re not prepared to accept this, then you can’t really call yourself a
Christian”. They might not think that’s what they’re regularly telling me, but
that’s message that I receive and/or perceive.
So, I
continue my meandering faith exploration – with its joys and all its doubts. I
very much miss the reassurances and encouragement from people like our former
vicar Lee, who was at pains to welcome people like me “whatever page you’re on
at the present time” in terms of our individual spiritual journeys.
PS: The above isn’t a plea for
guidance(!)… I simply felt the need to record (for me) how I’m thinking faith-wise
at the present time.
Thursday, February 10, 2022
dr semmelweis…
Moira and I went to the theatre for the first time since the FIRST lockdown this afternoon… to see “Dr Semmelweis”, based on an original idea from and featuring Mark Rylance (as the doctor) and developed with Writer Stephen Brown and Director Tom Morris. We’ve missed the theatre hugely and it was great to be back.
You’ve probably never heard of Dr Ignaz Semmelweis, but he was a pioneer (and controversial) surgeon practicing in 19th century Vienna – when the city was confronted by the terrible death toll of childbed fever. Semmelweis, a Hungarian, makes a discovery that had the potential to save hundreds of thousands of new mothers, but he faced strong opposition in the form of the medical establishment – who question his methods, reject his theory and even doubt his sanity.
During the current Covid pandemic, we’ve all been urged to “wash your hands”. Well, although the play was conceived before the pandemic, Semmelweis’s similar pleas for his fellow doctors to wash their hands represents a poignant reminder of how much we’ve learnt and how little we knew.
The production was elaborate and very impressive – a total of 22 performers (actors, musicians and dancers) are listed in the programme and, on top of that, there are large creative and production teams. Theatre is an expensive business – and one that’s suffered enormously over the past two grim, pandemic years.
It was an incredibly impressive production, with wonderful performances by very talented performers. The Old Vic was full and the audience’s hugely positive reaction at the end was both appropriate and telling.
I’ve been to a lot of theatre over the years and I’ve seen some pretty outstanding individual performances by some pretty amazing actors, but I honestly don’t think I’ve ever witnessed a performance to match that of Mark Rylance. Utterly mesmerising. Quite, quite breathtaking. It will live in the memory for the rest of my days.
Oh, how I’ve missed the theatre!
PS: ‘Our’ Felix (Hayes) played Dr Ferdinand von Hebra… and, of course, was very good!
PPS: I know I keep going on about face masks(!) but, again, the entire audience wore masks… those few who were unmasked as they took their seats were soon handed a face mask by one of the stewards and asked, unless they were unable to for medical reasons, to do so (and I didn’t see anyone object).
Tuesday, February 08, 2022
parallel mothers…
I went along to the Watershed AGAIN this afternoon (that’s twice in less than a week – just like old times!), this time to see Pedro Almodóvar’s film “Parallel Mothers”. It’s a baby-swap drama (sorry about the spoiler, but it’s difficult to describe the film without reference to it) about two single mothers (played by Penélope Cruz and Milena Smit) and buried secrets from the Spanish civil war.
These heavily pregnant women share a hospital room and bond over their decision to go it alone. The two women’s newborns are whisked away for observational reasons at the same time… over time, one of them begins to doubt whether her child is really hers and orders a DNA test online. The disquieting results mean that the two women get back in touch and re-establish their extraordinary relationship… and experiences of their own mothers… and also the unhealed wound of Spain’s fascist past. The father of one of children is an anthropologist working with a historical unit formed to trace people murdered by Francoists during the civil war and buried in unmarked mass graves… and the mother (Cruz) believes that her great-grandfather was one such victim.
I think I’d best leave it there (things are somewhat more complicated than I’ve inferred).
I decided to see the film after reading Peter Bradshaw’s 5-star review in The Guardian and, although I did enjoy the film, it left me feeling a little disappointed.
For me, although I found the film both absorbing and quite moving, I also felt it was somewhat contrived and implausible.
PS: Again, I’m delighted to report that the entire audience wore face masks. Thank you Watershed!
january-february 2022 books…
Convenience Store Woman (Sayaka Murata): This is our next Storysmith bookgroup book. It’s a novel about a 36 year-old woman, Keiko, who’s been working in the same Japanese convenience store for 18 years. Keiko is an oddball character (bullied and friendless at school)… she once hit a boy with a spade to stop him fighting; another time she asks her mother if she can eat a dead budgie found in the park. I came to the conclusion that she was perhaps slightly autistic(?) – certainly her love of organisation, structure and routine was hugely important to her. She’s never had a boyfriend. Her parents want her to get a better job. Her friends wonder why she won’t get married… but Keiko loves her job and she’s an excellent employee – efficient, courteous, never late, never absent. She knows what makes her happy and she’s not going to let anyone take her away from her convenience store. Much of the book reads more like a non-fiction description of convenience store life and routines. It’s a ridiculously absurd novel and yet also quite compelling, funny and charming.
No One Is Talking About This (Patricia Lockwood): Four of my friends nominated this novel as their favourite book of 2021… so I thought I’d give it a go! The first half of the book is something of a whirlwind description of the absurdity (and reliance?) of online life. Frankly (not being part of any Twitterworld and not even really understanding such things), it took some time to get my head around what Lockwood was talking about - “the new communication, the new slipstream of information”. It’s written as something of a third-person diary and, clearly, Lockwood is a very gifted, imaginative and exceptional writer - even though I really struggled to keep up with her ‘stream of consciousness’ observations (bluntly, perhaps I’m just not clever enough?). While the second half of the novel continues in similar vein, it abruptly becomes far more ‘real’ in that the central character’s sister becomes pregnant, and the child is born with very severe birth defects (the book’s acknowledgements refer to Lockwood’s real-life sister and brother-in-law who let her “share in their daughter’s life” – she had been diagnosed with Proteus Syndrome). It’s something of an emotional rollercoaster – when (as the book jacket tells us) “real life collides with the increasing absurdity of a world accessed through a screen”. Impressive in its way, but not exactly my particular cup-of-tea.
Friday, February 04, 2022
belfast...
Moira and I went along to the Watershed yesterday to see Kenneth Branagh’s autobiographical movie about the Belfast of his childhood.
It’s set in 1969. The family (husband played by Jamie Dornam; long-suffering wife by Caitríona Balfe; and their two sons – played by Lewis McAskie and Jude Hill) lives in a mainly Protestant area of north Belfast, alongside a few Catholic families (and in relative harmony).
But violence explodes when unionist hardmen burn the Catholics out of their homes and set up barricades to protect their new neighbourhood against republican retaliation and the film represents a salient reminder of those awful times – all in the ‘name of religion’(!).
At times, it all makes for difficult viewing but, thankfully, the despair of the Northern Irish situation is far outweighed by pragmatism and humour of the ‘ordinary’ people.
At times, despite the painful references to the ‘Troubles’, it perhaps felt a little too ‘sugar-coated’ or sentimental – helped by the wonderful Van Morrison on the soundtrack (Van Morrison, of course, was the ONLY appropriate music to accompany the film!) – but the mix worked very well for me.
I think my only criticism was the difficulty, at times, in understanding what was being said – not because I couldn’t hear, but because I couldn’t make out what people were saying. Some of this was undoubtedly due to my failure to catch the Northern Irish accent. Sadly, I’ve become so used to watching the telly with sub-titles these days that I really missed them!
I went to the cinema thinking this film might not be for me… but I was completely wrong. I thought it was rather special.
PS: My second film of the year at the Watershed (and also my second black+white film) and I’m delighted to report that, once again, EVERY member of the audience wore a face-mask!
Tuesday, February 01, 2022
not me guv’…
Sue Gray must be fuming… (I’m fuming!).
Thanks to the intervention of the Met Police, her report on the “alleged gatherings on government premises during Covid restrictions” was ‘limited’, to say the least (the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg describes it as a “terse summary”).
Despite this, the report was still utterly damning of government leadership (and who leads the government?) – a fact that hardly came as a surprise to anyone who’s been following the reported events. Sadly, because of the Metropolitan Police’s intervention, Gray’s report lacks all the crucial details, including (and I quote from the report): emails; Whatsapp messages; text messages; photographs; and building entry and exit logs. Gray lists 16 ‘gatherings’ and goes on to point out that all but 4 of these are currently being investigated by the Met.
Again quoting from the BBC’s political editor (and, frankly, I could have used any number of quotes from other journalists), “it is there now in black and white for all to see - there was rule breaking at the top of government when the country was living through lockdown. The prime minister's original claim that all the guidelines were followed seems almost farcical now”.
In the past, matters of honesty, integrity, trust and responsibility would have been regarded as essential qualities of any prime minister. Given what we already knew, Mr Johnson should have resigned weeks ago. Given the contents of Ms Gray’s much-edited report, he should have resigned yesterday… but, of course, he didn’t.
Many Tory MPs have been hugely critical of the prime minister and have made it clear that he no longer receives their support; many others continue to support Mr Johnson through (blind?) loyalty. Others tell us that they’re going to await outcome of the Met Police’s investigations.
When will that be? A fortnight? A month?
Well, yesterday, the Met Police told us that their investigation “would not take more than a year”.
What an utter, utter farce.
In political
terms, the key questions are simply: “Did the prime minister mislead
parliament?” and “Did the prime minister break the Covid rules?”. If the answer
to either of these is “yes”, then Mr Johnson has to resign. In the ridiculous
circumstances that we find ourselves in, surely it’s not asking too much for
the Met to begin their investigations (from various comments made yesterday, it
seems that they have yet to make a start!) by pursuing the specific allegations
relating to the ‘gatherings’ that the prime minister apparently attended?
Surely, even by the Met’s own ‘speed of operation’ (apologies for irony), it
wouldn’t take more than a few days to establish the facts (afterall, Ms Gray
has done much of the groundwork)
But, hey, what do I know! I’m just a
boring old fogey who despairs of what we’ve become.
It shouldn’t be like this.
Friday, January 21, 2022
cricket, lovely cricket?
After the humiliating Ashes series in Australia, the ECB has just released the cricket fixtures for the coming season. Unsurprisingly, once again, the four-day County Championship games (the closest format to Test cricket) have been largely relegated to the beginning and end of the season – although the ECB is at pains to tell us that this isn’t QUITE as bad as last year. The details obviously very from team to team but, essentially, it will provide six matches in April+May, four games in June+July; and four games in August+September. Once again, the bish-bosh white ball cricket (in the form of the Vitality Blast and Royal London Cup) take pride of place in the height of the English summer – with The Hundred tournament following on from July onwards.
Following events in Australia, people have been reaffirming their belief that Test cricket is the finest form of the game and urging the powers-that-be to make changes to ensure the County Championship is given a much higher priority. Unlike the ‘old days’, the coming season will feature England Test matches against New Zealand… and India… oh, and South Africa – with fixtures being played June-September!
So, if the County Championship is the ‘feeder nursery’ servicing the England Test team with fresh, young talented players, you really do wonder how this will happen.
You really couldn’t make it up.
These days, many of the current England Test players have central contracts from the ECB (20 annual contracts covering both red and white ball cricket). This effectively takes away England’s Test players from the County Championship (eg. I think Joe Root played just the two games for Yorkshire last season). So, today’s County cricketers are getting virtually no experience of playing against/with Test cricketers… until perhaps (if they’re very ‘lucky’ and England have to seek players from outside the contracted individuals) when they’re ‘called up’ into the Test team (probably at very short notice)!
The four-day County Championship format is the closest to emulating five-day Test cricket. It’s the ONLY ‘training’ format that provides aspiring Test cricketers with the opportunity of ‘building an innings’ or ‘develop bowling techniques and tactics’ or even captaincy. I was brought up watching games played between counties and the international touring sides and these all featured the very best players the English counties could provide – watching cricket that featured ‘proper stars’ of the game. These days, county championship teams are reduced to fielding ‘non-stars’ (featuring players either at the beginning or the end of their careers).
But, as things stand, these county cricketers also have to ‘perform’ in the white-ball, bish-bosh games to justify their place at their county clubs.
You really couldn’t make it up.
As you’re probably aware (from my various cricket blogposts over the years), I am a great lover of County Cricket – I enjoy its rhythm and pace, the traditional field settings (not like the limited overs games with fielders frequently relegated to the boundary rope), the tactics and the skills. Yes, I’m definitely an old codger, but I genuinely fear for the future of the game unless drastic changes are made over the next two or three seasons. I absolutely accept that the limited overs cricket matches provide the counties with a significant proportion of their finances (other than the sums provided by the ECB from Test Match incomes) but I do believe that the game needs to be fundamentally changed to cater for two DIFFERENT formats of cricket in which counties each have TWO teams – one exclusively for red-ball matches and the other for the white-ball game. I also feel that the number of Test Matches needs to be reduced, so that England Test players (for example) are able to perform in far more County Championship games (and also allow more international cricketers to be able spend time learning the game in its traditional format).
Yes, I’m just a boring, old cricket-lover and, yes, the Australia, India and New Zealand Test cricket sides don’t seem to be suffering in the same way as their English counterparts… but SOMETHING has to be done (and quickly!).
But, hey, what do I know?!
the tragedy of macbeth…
I went to the Watershed yesterday - for only the third time in the past two years (I know!) - to see Joel Coen’s “The Tragedy of Macbeth”, featuring Denzel Washington (Macbeth) and Frances McDormand (Lady Macbeth). We all know the Shakespeare play and there was part of me wondering why they were making another film of it (there have been at least seven other screen adaptations).
But, frankly, it was worth it. Washington and McDormand were both predictably brilliant and the stark black and white film portrayal powerfully and wonderfully apt. I loved designer Stefan Dechant’s imagining of Macbeth’s castle as a giant modernist house, with ‘sharp’ edges, dramatic level changes and courtyards enclosed by huge high walls. The witch apparition was disturbingly impressive and I found Birnam Wood ‘coming to’ Macbeth’s castle, with Malcolm’s soldiers holding tree-branches over their heads, eerily effective.
All in all, it was very good to be back in the cinema (and, happily, EVERYONE was wearing a face-mask!).
Monday, January 17, 2022
january 2022 books…
Allegorizings (Jan Morris): As you probably know, I’m a great lover of Morris’s books. I still regret that I no longer have the hardback copy of the James Morris edition of ‘Oxford’ (published in 1965)(I’ve owned the Jan Morris paperback version, published in 1978, since 1979)… clearly, I ‘lent’ it to someone and sadly never had it returned. One dictionary definition of ‘allegorize’ is to “interpret or represent symbolically” (just so you know). This book of essays/musings was published in 2021 (one year on from her death at the age of 94) and she was well aware that it would be published posthumously; they’re effectively no more than ‘idle thoughts or perhaps ‘whimsy’ (some serious, but mostly funny and entertaining… and one or two that I frankly found quite boring). The range of subjects is wide (understatement) - from falling over; zoos; whistling; hot water bottles; kindness; about her no longer believing in nationality “or the cursed Nation-State”; and even nose-picking! There’s also a wonderful piece about Princess Diana: in Morris’s opinion, she should “have been given the all-but-superannuated royal yacht Britannia, which nobody knew what to do with, and invited to rollick her way around the world on the national behalf, living it up without inhibition, taking a new boyfriend to every port (or finding one there) and distributing a taste of outrageous English gaiety among the nations”! A lovely, very enjoyable book that I’ll no doubt continue to dip into over the years to come.






