The Big Read

Not managed a proper post this week.  Not that there isn't plenty to talk about.  There is just not plenty of time in the day!  However, I did just want to recommend something.  In York this autumn, we have something called The Big Read.  The library people have organised these before - getting lots of free copies of a book and doing events based around its themes.

 

However, next week, the 2016 Big Read opens and they have chosen Renegeration by Pat Barker.  It is the first of a trilogy and is about the First World War.  It is not a new book but it is a wonderful book.  If you are a York reader of this blog, copies of the book are available from our libraries from 5 October.  The many events are already booking though - including a couple of visits from Pat Barker herself.

 

And if you are not in York, I highly recommend, in these days of 'the big society' having to run its own libraries, such an event.  Every museum and many organisations in the city are contributing and it promises to be a fantastic event.

 

With a thread true to the heart of this blog, they are also taking the opportunity to look at modern links to the themes of Regeneration, such as mental well-being.

 

http://www.exploreyork.org.uk/bigcityread/

The One with the Cultural Legacies

My children have discovered Friends.  Showing every evening on our holiday, it was great to revisit much loved episodes.  Apart from the occasional fashion issue or the distinct lack of technology to assist (or not) the characters' relationships, I think the shows' content has really stood the test of time.  They just make me laugh every time.  And the kids loved it.

This sharing of my loves has not always worked with the children.  Some things just don't work for succeeding generations.  The Bagpuss (above!) and Clangers DVDs gathering dust on my shelf are testament to this.  Books have not gone how I would have liked either.  Try as I might, I cannot pass on my love of 'classics' like Little Women, Treasure Island etc.  My son reads futuristic adventures like The Hunger Games.  My daughter loves Jacqueline Wilson at the moment.  They did both read some Enid Blyton in the past but not avidly.  Harry Potter has been actually the one series we definitely have in common.  Except of course I first read the books as an adult. 

So how are 'classics' decided?  How many generations have to adopt and love something before it is a 'classic'?  These days we refer to 'classic comedy', for example.  But mostly this means stuff from the Sixties and Seventies.  Is it measured by number of re-runs, number of awards?  Or by generational fanbase?  The Morecombe and Wise Show could be shown to every preceding and following generation and they would all 'get it'.  Well, once you had explained television to the preceding ones obviously.  Is it therefore the themes which constitute a classic?  A love story, a slapstick comedy, a war epic.  All understandable for hundreds of years, no matter what the fashions.

What about all the other stuff?  The books and shows which haven't really stood as classics but in their time were loved and admired.  Hundreds of books were written in the nineteenth century but sometimes you could be forgiven for thinking there were only a relatively few authors around.  Thousands of plays have been written.  Many rarely get a second outing.  Some forms of entertainment enjoyed by our ancestors have vanished forever.  Unless we have access to diaries or letters (sadly unlikely in most cases), we cannot have a rounded idea of what made our ancestors tick.  People should be required to leave recommended - and honest - reading/listening/viewing lists with their wills, maybe.  (In Friends, Rachel claims her favourite film is Dangerous Liaisons.  Her actual favourite is Weekend at Bernie's.  That kind of honesty...!)

On a related note, in the last week there has been a furore about changes to the Great British Bake Off.  Now, I do love the show but I don't believe it will be a classic.  We will not be watching its repeats in ten years time.  I think the more important things to take from the GBBO fuss are the further whittling away of the BBC's resources and the very creditable refusal of presenters Mel and Sue to change channels with the show.  It is a pity, though, that we can't better use the energy expended on outrage over television programmes, Z-list celebrities or random YouTube videos.

Unequal Opportunities

This week, whilst considering the reignited grammar school debate, I recalled my O Level project about education in my home town, Nuneaton - from 1870s church schools to the 1902 Education Act, standardising the various school boards.  The 1944 Act, reforming secondary education and introducing the 'tri-partite system' so much back in discussion now - grammar, secondary modern and technical schools.  And finally, in 1965 the Labour government instructing local authorities to begin converting from the tri-partite to comprehensives.  A policy decision inherited by, of all people, Margaret Thatcher as Education Secretary in the early 1970s.  She opposed comprehensives but it was too late to change most authorities' plans.

The picture above shows King Edward VI College (as it is now called) in Nuneaton.  It began as one of many colleges established by Edward VI and survived as a fee paying boys' school right up until the 1944 Act.  It had been called King Edward Sixth Grammar School since the 1880s but from 1944, it was selection rather than fees which decided its entrants.  Then, in 1974, as part of the process which so outraged Thatcher, King Edward VI Grammar School closed.  It re-opened as a co-ed sixth form college.  I graced its doors in 1987 as a sixth former  but it was still referred to as 'KEGS' by everyone in the town - ie the grammar school.  A little piece of history surviving endless change.

I do not agree with grammar schools.  I do not think any child should have their life choices affected so definitively at age eleven. 

My own children are each very different in outlook.  I am sure they will both achieve excellent results in the end but I think it will take the youngest longer to knuckle down.  She is is Year 6 now though.  SATs year.  Or Eleven Plus year.  And I do not think she would be a candidate for a grammar place as things stand at the moment, which would mean a very different path for her life, for her self esteem if her brother had reached the grammar, and so on, ad infinitum.

My own comprehensive experience was, it has to be said, greatly enhanced by streaming.  But there was opportunity for all and fluidity based on ability.  Total division at eleven does not allow for differences of development or personality.  A piece I read this morning said that in the previous post-1944 system, grammar places accounted for 15-25% of secondary places, depending on location.  If competition was considered to be fierce for places back in the 1950s, can you imagine what it would be like now?  The tutors, the pressure, the backbiting over who got in, the social exclusion issues. To say nothing of the social media backlash amongst children and their parents!  It is bad enough now with catchment issues in so many areas.

 

And what of the thousands of children without parental backing?  Or with backing but no resources?  My maternal grandfather was the first in his family to go to university.  An immense achievement in the 1930s and very unusual for a son of a railwayman.  It is a credit to the current system that his story would not be so unusual today.

 

Our schools are not perfect.  What institution is?  But we have made great strides, as the history of Nuneaton and KEGS shows.  From education for fee-paying males only to education for all.  Just thinking about the millions which will be wasted on these plans through public enquiries, civil service overtime and council battles makes me angry, let alone the actual proposals.  And as the incredibly brief one-town rundown above shows, the changes, if passed, will take years to implement.  We do not need grammar schools.  We need resources for our existing schools.  Unfortunately we are supposed to be planning how to compete in a 'post-Brexit world', aren't we?

 

Coatigans and Assumptions

Back on track after holiday.  At last.  Apologies for lack of posts for last two Mondays - between jet lag and then camping, neither Monday was very productive!

Anyway, yesterday I read an article in the Sunday Times Style Magazine.  It was called 'Are You Coatigan Woman?' and discussed the apparent 'rise' of the 'coatigan'.  A coat shaped/style of cardigan.  (Fairly self explanatory really.)

However, the journalist, Laura Craik, used the article mainly to poke fun at the kind of person who might wear such a garment.  It culminated in a list entitled 'You are coatigan woman if...'.  Now, one tries not to take such articles too seriously.  Even if they do feel a little close to home - the list included '...if you can't wait for Poldark tonight'.  Definitely me yesterday.  Hence excuse for gratuitous picture above.)

But the tone of the piece did anger me.  Why should any ordinary person be judged by a fashion journalist?  Fashion magazines are there to show us mortals the way, yes.  But was it necessary to make such statements as 'those who worship at the coatigan's drab beige feet are united less by age or demographic than by outlook' followed by another unworthy list?

We are all guilty of assumptions.  We make daily judgements on how people look, what they might be thinking, how they behave.  The Brexit result was the hideously spectacular result of many completely wrong assumptions about people's thoughts and behaviour.

And everyday that we blithely watch - with increasingly thick skins - the continuing chaos of the refugee crisis, we are making assumptions about the people who are trying to get to Europe.  We are told - or assume - many are criminals or terrorists.  Or 'economic migrants' after our jobs and our lifestyles and leaving perfectly reasonable lives behind.  We begin to believe they risk their children's lives on the Mediterranean because they are irresponsible - when actually they're at their wits' end.

When we look at our own family histories, assumptions are not a new phenomenon.  They are unfortunately a human trait.  And in writing your family history, you are continually making assumptions about people's actions in order to make some sense of the scant information you can glean from official records.  My ancestor who joined the army in 1804 and went to India gave his occupation as 'staymaker'.  I could assume he was a patriot who decided to fight.  More likely, he was in trouble with the law or destitute or even conned into signing up by a sergeant who got him drunk.

My descendants might look at photos of me and assume I was a badly dressed would-be writer who clearly ate quite a lot of cake.  Except for winter 2016/17 photos though!  Because I will be Coatigan Woman.  Yes, after reading the article, I held my head high and proudly purchased said item that very afternoon (that's how cross I was).  From Warehouse - proclaimed by the very same magazine having been 'transformed' this season.  I quote their assumption: 'you'll love this'.

In my absence...

I am currently away and will not be posting as normal this week.  Service resumes next week, hopefully!  In the meantime, may I recommend a book...

Just finished The Muse by Jessie Burton.  The author of The Miniaturist has produced an outstanding second novel.  The characters are brilliantly observed and the period settings are meticulous.  I absolutely loved it and am considering abandoning the rest of my holiday reading list in order to re-read it!

Talk to you soon....

Can Donald Trump Surf?

So I am off to California.  Apart from a brief stop in San Francisco nearly twenty years ago, I have never been there.  As a movie fan, I am beyond excited about Los Angeles and Hollywood.  And I am going to attempt to learn to surf.  (Or maybe paddleboard - a little more sedate.)

However, in this American election year, I am also curious about what we will find.  We are staying in San Diego too, near the Mexican border.  I intend to take my family to see the current arrangements - high metal border gates and so on.  I think it is important for us to see the physical manifestation of the way the world is going.  If Trump has his way, it will be a brick edifice of course.  But I think the border will be scary enough as it is.  And we are people who are unaffected by it - at present.

I say 'at present' because I believe if Trump were to succeed to in his plans, there are implications for the whole world.  The man is campaigning on a wave of hatred that could indeed propel him to the White House.  But if he makes it to the Oval Office, can he then ride the riptide which he will have unleashed?  Or will it be a closeout?

In the UK, reported hate crimes rose in the wake of the Brexit vote.  The very worst of our society thought they suddenly had the right to treat others with contempt.

Now let's just pause and think about what might happen in the US in the wake of a Trump victory, where everyone has the right to carry guns.  Guns so prevalent, incidentally, that a number of people are killed every year in the US by toddlers who have picked up loaded guns found in their homes.  Terrifying, isn't it? 

A politician aiming for national office in the US has to find factors which appeal to a huge variance in people, places and concerns.  Unifying factors which have historically been all too often based on fears.   The US is not the only place where this happens by any means.  But its open society and importance to the world in general make the knock-on effects of its domestic politics very troubling.

So I am 'looking forward' - for want of a better phrase - to hearing 'the word on the street'.  To seeing some of the bonkers TV election ads.  To trying to gauge, just a little, what people think might happen.  Although I don't think a Brit is the best person to ask for political predictions at the moment.  Let alone surfing advice*.

*although I have been reading the slang.  Can you tell??!

More World History, Please

For the last couple of weeks I have been listening to The Silk Roads by Peter Frankopan on Audible.  It is a fascinating 'reassessment of world history' as the blurb says.

 

Frankopan starts with the idea that centuries ago, maps of the  known world centred on places like Constantinople and even further East.  I am now about half way through and it has been so amazing to hear about places like Kabul, Baghdad and Palmyra in such a different context to what we are used to in our century.  Such rich histories and civilisations.  I knew, of course, these places had incredible stories from way back but it is hard to imagine when all you see and hear most days in relation to them is destruction.  My own grandfather used to work in places like Baghdad and Beirut and that was only in the twentieth century but it seems unimaginable when you see how things are today.  And I was never given the opportunity to study them before.

 

There are many aspects of The Silk Roads which I could discuss in relation to the themes of this blog.  For example, it has given me some idea of the movement of peoples in Asia and shown me why my DNA test has traces of Afghanistan and Tibet in its 22% Asian.

 

It also ties in very much with modern day politics.  I have written quite a few times about how we are none of us pure 'Anglo' and how immigration and people movements are not a modern phenomenon nor should they be feared.  The main events our politicians reference are really very recent in comparison to the history of the world.  The millennial-old patterns shown in The Silk Roads are simply being continued today.  It is tactics and technology that have changed.

 

And as for Britain, the battle since the Second World War to maintain our 'place in the world', our space at the 'top table' as our press refer to it, seems a minor blip when you consider that the first proper maps of the world barely acknowledged our existence.  And Seventy years of European co-operation is nothing when seen alongside Frankopan's assessment of historical trends.

 

I am really looking forward to hearing the second half of the book and I really recommend you give it a try if you would like to try to better understand the times through which we are living at the moment.  It is a very accessible account of a period and of places which I feel are very much neglected in our education system.  Our children need more understanding of the history of the world as a whole, rather than 'Tudors', 'Victorians', etc. if peace is every to come again.

No News Can Be Good News

Last Friday afternoon, I was driving along glorious country lanes.  It was amazing weather, we were on the way to a favourite campsite and we were singing along to All Request Friday on Radio 2.  But just as I was looking out for the last turning, my phone pinged and the news about a gunman in Munich flashed up.  Instantly, the mood in the car felt different.  I mean, the kids didn't know and I carried on.  But it felt like world events had once again taken a bit of the pleasure out of everyday life.  You are imagining the scenes, thinking how those people must feel.

I am all for modern technologies.  I can see the endless reasons why instant news/contact/banking etc are advantages our ancestors did not have but still...  Is it really good for us to live with 'news' infringing at every opportunity?

We lurch from awful news story to awful news story on these twenty four hour channels and on the endless news websites.  I watch and read these as much as anyone.  But I just wonder if our ancestors were happier when they didn't know what was going on?  The worldwide wars, the Crusades, the natural disasters, the plagues all made little ripple in everyday people's lives until ages after events.  Unless they were unlucky enough to live in those areas.

Our twenty first century expectation, on the other hand, is to know what is happening everywhere, all the time.  As another less serious example, going on holiday to a new hotel or cottage used to be mostly guesswork.  You were lucky to even see a couple of pictures before you got there - and those would be taken from the most advantageous angle.  Now, we expect to have taken a video tour, read fifty reviews on Trip Advisor and looked at the area on Google Earth before we even set off.

 

There are few such happy places as a British campsite on a fine summer night.  A constant burble of chat, jokes and laughter interspersed with cheers from endless cricket and rounders matches.  And all the better - with no offence to anyone affected by this weekends' news stories - for the lack of 4G or television or even a newspaper shop.  Just for a little while, it is still possible to step off the news treadmill.

Opinions for the Future

 

Once again, there are any number of unbelievable events which I could write about from the last week.  It is impossible to do justice to the suffering of those caught up in the latest attacks/coups.  To say nothing of the continuing wars and refugee crises.  Maybe the person who posted this week that David Bowie had been the glue that held the Universe together was actually right... 

 

Before the horror of Nice though, the entire world seemed to shout a collective 'What the f...??!!!' at the announcement of Boris Johnson as the new UK Foreign Secretary.  Clearly Prime Minister May now has Johnson, the Leave figurehead, firmly in her debt but it does seem incredibly risky to be sending such a buffoon (polite description) on diplomatic errands.  We will have to pin our hopes on the ever present Civil Service to keep him under control, a la Yes Minister.

 

But future descendants of Boris will at least have access to a mass of information and speculation about the motivations on all sides.  Chapter and verse for his personal and political histories.  Possibly his own diaries.  However badly he performs.

 

This is the 'privilege' of fame or notoriety.  Descendants of the very famous or aristocratic never need to grub about in county records offices or trawl through online newspapers.  Their family history is freely available.  (Distant relations of Big Brother contestants or other minor celebrities will have a job separating the endless 'saucy' selfies from the true facts but hey, it'll add a new dimension to family history.)

 

I have argued many times on this blog that our historical records lack ordinary voices.  In 1937, a project called Mass Observation was started in Bolton.  It began as an artists' curiosity project but once the Second World War began, it was an important exercise in public opinion and requirements.  Its people observed, eavesdropped on and photographed ordinary lives.  Plus members of the public kept daily diaries.  To quote David Dimbleby's BBC series Seven Ages Of Britain, governments began to realise that they 'could not just tell people what to do, they actually had to listen to what they were saying.'

 

For something like Brexit, our descendants should not be left with simply academic or journalistic opinions.  Or with the thoughts of the privileged.  Somebody or some organisation needs to be recording ordinary opinions.  Social media is all very well as a record but Mass Observation, for example, was very fond of gleaning information in the pubs or on the streets.  Social media generally excluding the views of the elderly being a good example of the need for this.

 

To quote Dimbleby again, 'Bolton stood as an example of the great Northern cities which supplied much of the nation's wealth but which had a long history of being ignored by the South.'  Sounds terribly familiar in the context of what we already know about the split of the Brexit vote, doesn't it?  Someone should have been 'mass observing' before David Cameron decided to assume he could win a referendum.

David for PM

Late posting today.  Partly doing school holiday stuff and partly because everything I thought of writing seemed to pale compared to the increasingly mad UK political news.

As if leaving the EU wasn't enough, our 'politicians' seem to have lost the will to live.  And apparently in two days time, the one who started it all - David Cameron - will retire to his estates having graciously handed over to (gratefully chucked it to) the second ever female prime minister, Theresa May (apologies if by the time you read this, the news has changed again and Kermit the Frog or someone equally well qualified is taking over).

This weekend, the debacle over Andrea 'Loathsome' Leadsom did at least spark some interesting teen 'show and tell' events in our family.  We were staying with friends and the adults were busy exclaiming over the hideous parenting-related claims which had burst forth from the woman.  And our nearly teen was earwigging.  The journey home therefore severely tested my powers as a politics graduate.  Rather large questions such as 'what is a feminist', 'what do Left and Right mean in politics' and 'why there has only ever been one female prime minister before now', fired from the backseat for most of the way.

I noted on Facebook this week that I was horrified to find myself wishing for a Theresa May victory and even more disturbed by the failure of the Left to produce any female leaders.  I spent my own teen years protesting against Thatcher - for the miners, against the Poll Tax, in favour of CND, etc.  I can only hope Theresa May manages to conduct herself and the government in a less adversarial way.  Mind you, at least Thatcher had a well-honed plan - whether you agreed with it or not.  No-one at the moment seems to have a clue.  (Must have Brexit-itis - I have just expressed a positive sentiment about the Milk Snatcher.)

Previously I have posted about where our political beliefs come from.  I had one Left and one Right parent growing up.  It never occurred to me to vote Tory though.  My innate tendencies were firmly Left wing.  I am now very curious to see where my children end up on the political scale.  They too have one Left and one Right parent but their father is more economically Right than in terms of equal rights etc.  But how will their views be affected by what we are living through right now?  By the time they are - hopefully - coming out of university, we will have Brexited.  What will they be concerned about?  Britain's place in the world?  Or basics necessities like finding a job in a shrivelled economy?  Or all the rights which they know their ancestors enjoyed and which no longer exist?

Will May be the saviour of the country or the bogeywoman of their teen years?  Who will grasp Brexit and make the best of it?  Theresa May is the best of a very sorry bunch - and I sadly include Labour in that.

Mind you, Youngest might have an idea.  She asked me this afternoon whether David Beckham would now have to move out of Downing Street...  Maybe we should be moving him in... his management would never have let things come to this.  A worldwide PR and financial disaster.