CITIZEN PAIN

YousafIt’s not often a headline provokes a spontaneous ‘Oh, no!’ from yours truly, but I have to admit when I saw Humza Yousaf had been elected the new SNP leader, it did. The man who embodies all the double-standard hypocrisy inherent in the militantly PC ‘Progressive’ Identitarian brigade, who was amongst the hardest of hardliners when it came to lockdown cheerleading, who was the driving force behind Scotland’s contentious hate crime bill intended to outlaw free speech in the privacy of one’s home, who believes all a man has to do to change sex is to proclaim himself a woman, whose authoritarian leanings Kim Jong-Un would regard as a tad extreme, whose absence of humour led him to accuse those who retweeted a video of him falling off a scooter (that made him look like a prize prat) of every ‘ism’ under the sun – this is the man chosen by his party to succeed Nicola Sturgeon as the former First Minister and her husband exit under a cloud of controversy and financial scandal? I think the last time an in-party leadership appointment sparked such a bout of head-shaking was when Comrade Corbyn was elected Labour leader; but I suppose if the promotion of Sturgeon’s Health Secretary turns out as well as that did, the Union is perhaps secure after all.

If one were to invent the ultimate right-on politician for a cartoon to appear in, say, Private Eye, chances are one wouldn’t have to delve too deep into satire were Humza Yousaf to be used as the model. The man is practically a parody of the species as it is, making Sadiq Khan look like Nigel Farage; even the Guardian and the Labour Party would probably find him a bit much; indeed, Labour’s Deputy north of the border Jackie Baillie described Yousaf as ‘the worst Health Secretary on record’ in reference to the decline and fall of Scotland’s NHS on his watch. One wonders if Citizen Yousaf parades his Woke credentials with such pride as a canny smokescreen to mask his mediocre performance in office. The SNP’s Kate Forbes, one of his rivals in the race to supersede Sturgeon, was even more cutting in her criticism. ‘You were Transport Minister and the trains were never on time,’ she said to him during a televised debate; ‘when you were Justice Secretary the police were stretched to breaking point, and now as Health Minister we’ve got record high waiting times.’

Quick to play the race card and leap on any barely-mobile bandwagon he thinks will signal his unimpeachable virtue, Yousaf once retweeted a video that allegedly showed Glasgow Rangers footballers engaging in a sectarian singsong; his undue haste swiftly proved to be a misjudgement when the video was exposed as a fake. Only recently, he and his wife dropped a £30,000 legal claim against a Dundee nursery they accused of ‘discrimination’ simply because the place didn’t have room for their precious daughter; the fact these claims that the nursery described as ‘demonstrably false’ have cost it tens of thousands of pounds to defend its good name evidently matter not in the noble pursuit of social justice. Yet, as is so often the case with those who wear their virtue as a T-shirt, all is not what it seems. As a noted advocate of the Stonewall brand of ‘gay rights’, Yousaf was famously absent from the decisive vote on gay marriage at Holyrood in 2014 – an absence blamed at the time by Alex Salmond on pressure from a Glasgow mosque (Yousaf is a Muslim), something Yousaf denied. And let’s not forget that six months into his stint as Transport Secretary he was fined £300 by police for driving a friend’s car without the required insurance.

But it was Citizen Yousaf’s promotion to Justice Secretary in 2018 that earned him the authoritarian spurs he wore so well during the pandemic. His flagship policy was the aforementioned Hate Crime and Public Order Act. Despite opposition from the likes of the Law Society of Scotland and the Scottish Police Federation – not to mention JK Rowling, who ran the risk of being prosecuted on dubious ‘transphobia’ charges – Yousaf promoted the bill with all the blinkered belligerence of the zealous fanatic, disingenuously selling the policy as a triumph of #BeKind bullshit over ‘intolerance’; former SNP Deputy Jim Sillars described the bill as ‘one of the most pernicious and dangerous pieces of legislation ever produced by any government in modern times in any part of the United Kingdom.’ Only during its passage through the Scottish Parliament was the bill amended to prevent the prosecution of those unintentionally promoting ‘hate’, such as libraries accidentally displaying books that should obviously be burned in the nearest public square; however, Citizen Yousaf stands by his belief that anyone uttering unacceptable comments behind their own closed doors is committing a punishable offence. If you’ve ever seen the 2002 movie set in a totalitarian future, ‘Equilibrium’ – where the lead character played by Christian Bale has to bite his lip around his children, who think nothing of ‘grassing him up’ to the authorities should he say the wrong thing in private – you’ll be more than aware such a law brings fiction one step closer to frightening fact.

His switch to Scotland’s Health Secretary neatly coincided with the arrival of Covid, and Yousaf entered into the scaremongering spirit by declaring in June 2021 that ten children under the age of 10 had been admitted to hospitals in Scotland the week before suffering from the coronavirus – a claim refuted by the officer for the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, who said the children in question were not hospitalised due to Covid and that there was no rise in the virus amongst children; Yousaf retracted his claim, but still played a key role in ensuring Scottish schoolchildren were unnecessarily masked-up for lessons, a move then spinelessly replicated south of the border simply because Boris Johnson didn’t want to get into another kerfuffle with Nicola Sturgeon. Moreover, rising waiting times for an ambulance prompted the Health Secretary to urge the public to ‘think twice’ before dialling 999, a call criticised as reckless by his opposite Tory number; the findings of Audit Scotland in the wake of this revealed there were 500 deaths in Scotland in September 2021 due to ambulance delays.

Of course, the election of Humza Yousaf as SNP leader being an in-house appointment – and Yousaf upholding all the progressive values that are so highly-prized amongst privileged politicians who don’t take the concerns of the plebs into consideration – the SNP hierarchy are naturally delighted by the succession. For them, it was a foregone conclusion; seen as Sturgeon’s ideological heir, Yousaf was the man the ‘progressive’ wing of the party wanted. It remains to be seen how his appointment will be received by the wider Scottish electorate, which – despite SNP propaganda – actually includes some who not only baulk at Yousaf’s more extreme proposals, but who don’t actually crave independence either. It should be remembered that one of the severe misjudgements that appeared to accelerate the retirement of Wee Nicola was the highly-publicised case of the violent rapist who suddenly (not to say conveniently) took a turn down the ‘self-identification’ route and proclaimed he was now a woman; courtesy of policies advocated by Humza Yousaf, this proclamation resulted in said rapist-in-drag being shipped off to a women’s prison.

Humza Yousaf’s commitment to this particular cause may win him plaudits in the upper echelons of his party and in activist circles; but out there beyond the cosy confines of the echo chamber, he may find such fanatical support for an issue that helped push his predecessor towards the door marked ‘exit’ might not assist him in his mission. That mission, lest we forget, is the same mission every SNP leader before him has been genetically modified to embark upon. But internal elections don’t always produce the right man, woman (or non-binary individual) for the job. Just ask Liz Truss.

© The Editor

Website: https://www.johnnymonroe.co.uk/

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?fan_landing=true&u=56665294

Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/807270946

COULD DO BETTER

WhackoAn anecdote I’ve a feeling I’ve recounted on here once before nevertheless seems apt for retelling at the moment; it came to me via my mother during her lengthy stint as a school dinner-lady. I remember her speaking of an Ofsted inspection at her place of employment, one which was telegraphed in advance to the headmaster; in preparation for this visit, he ensured all the school’s most troublesome pupils were absent for the duration, giving them a day-off in order that there wouldn’t be any disruptive incidents to affect the judgement of the inspectors as to whether the headmaster ran a tight ship or couldn’t control his kids. I’ve no doubt this is a common occurrence when so much of a school’s future fortunes hinge on the importance of a good Ofsted report, though the fact the stakes are so high – with staff members aware a school labelled ‘failing’ could provoke redundancies and leave it terminally incapable of turning things around due to the black mark against its name – means the strain can sometimes prove too much for those in the Ofsted firing line. Those like Ruth Perry, head teacher at Caversham Primary School in Reading.

As has been heavily publicised over the past week, 53-year-old Ruth Perry committed suicide in January, following an Ofsted inspection of her school; although the report wasn’t published until after her death, Ms Perry had been informed its findings downgraded Caversham Primary’s rating from Outstanding to Inadequate, though under Ofsted rulings was unable to inform her staff, having to carry that knowledge around in her head for 54 days. The sudden plummet down the chart is the nightmare of every head teacher, knowing full well the devastating effect such a fall can have on morale, careers and recruitment; the pressure of awaiting the Ofsted judgement, and the knowledge of how a bad report following an inspection has the power to completely redefine a school in terms of its reputation and the reputations of those who work there, evidently pushed Ruth Perry over the edge; but what her death has done is to prompt other head teachers with bad experiences of the somewhat callous attitude of Ofsted to emerge from the shadows and bring these experiences into the open.

What was described by Suffolk Primary Headteacher’s Association as a ‘Damoclean sword hanging over dedicated professionals for months and years on end’ is being blamed as a prime cause of Ruth Perry’s decision to take her own life by her family; however, it would appear this has been a dam approaching bursting point for a long time when it comes to head teachers anticipating negative findings from an organisation whose arrival at the school gates sounds more like a visit from the Gestapo. Ruth Perry’s sister has spoken of the two months between the Ofsted inspection and her sister’s suicide. ‘All during that process,’ says Julia Waters, ‘every time I spoke to her, she would talk about the countdown. I remember clearly one day her saying 52 days and counting.’ The picture painted is of head teachers in Ruth Perry’s position feeling as though they’re trapped on death row, crossing off the days until their date with the electric chair. I remember a headmaster at one of my schools used to keep a golf club in his office and practice putting; how times have changed.

That horrible term, ‘league tables’, seemed to materialise in relation to schools during the New Labour era, applying the Thatcherite notion of so-called healthy competition to the classroom; education, education, education, I suppose. But schools aren’t – or shouldn’t be like – football clubs, permanently engaged in promotion or relegation battles, on tenterhooks awaiting Ofsted grading as though it equated with a do-or-die last game of the season and being downgraded was akin to dropping from the Premier League into the Championship. Those running schools in less affluent areas on a shoestring budget, for example, have routinely complained repeatedly negative Ofsted grading makes their task even more difficult; and parents who vigorously study league tables with the same manic intensity as some study the form of racehorses will naturally choose the champions for their precious child over a school struggling in the bottom three. In one sense, it appears to have created a two-tier system within state education, with schools receiving the coveted ‘Outstanding’ grade having far more applicants than they can accommodate and those given the thumbs-down reduced to a dumping ground for children whose parents aren’t prepared (or aren’t financially able) to play the ‘catchment area’ lottery.

Ofsted is ‘tin-eared’, showing ‘scant regard for the wellbeing of schoolteachers’ according to the President of the National Association of Head Teachers; amidst calls by teaching unions for Ofsted inspections to be temporarily suspended, a former registered inspector for Ofsted called John Bold didn’t mince his words on ‘Today’ this morning, delivering a damning verdict on the system and the ‘limiting judgement’’ tactic – i.e. one-word summaries of the inspected school as either Outstanding, Good, Requires Improvement or Inadequate – he blames for leading to Ruth Perry’s suicide; he believes inspections should continue though there should be ‘an immediate and radical change’. He went on to say, ‘Labour created this botched framework and the Conservatives have failed to improve it…the Department for Education does not have the skills or knowledge to regulate schools; it’s putting people who don’t understand the work in charge that has led us to this position…(the system) is producing unreliable and misleading – and in this case fatal – reports; and the reason I’m angry about this is that I know from my own experience and temperament that this could have happened to me if I’d been on the end of an ill-informed and unfair report.’

When asked what he himself thought should be done to improve the system, Mr Bold replied, ‘The first thing that needs to happen is the idea of a limiting judgement needs to be removed instantly so that a school is judged on its merits and inspectors make a properly balanced judgement. This is a seriously misleading report and should not have happened; it’s been building up for about 17 years and it must change; the DFE does not have the skills to regulate schools. It does not know how to do it; these are civil servants, they don’t have the teaching experience. I’m unusual as an inspector – I’m a teacher primarily, not a manager.’ The National Education Union has echoed Mr Bold’s sentiments by handing in a petition at Downing Street demanding the Government replaces Ofsted, though Amanda Spielman, chief inspector of Ofsted, has remained resolute in her belief that inspections are necessary and important, despite the open criticism of the system from the teaching profession in the wake of Ruth Perry’s death.

The tragic case of Ruth Perry has certainly lifted a lid on a world most outside of the teaching profession were largely ignorant of. School inspections are nothing new, of course, but the increased significance to schools of Ofsted findings and the obsession with league tables seem to have transformed education into a business, which it surely shouldn’t be. Ruth Perry wasn’t the CEO of a company competing for contracts with rival firms; she was a teacher, something she apparently regarded as a vocation for the 32 years it constituted her working life. I doubt Alan Sugar has ever viewed what he does as a vocation, yet one gets the feeling schools are now looked upon by many in government and at the Department for Education as if they were indistinguishable from industry. For most reading this – and indeed for the author – school days were quite some time ago and conducted in environments that would be thought of as Victorian to the majority of today’s school-kids, not to mention teachers; but anyone who made it through that system with the intention of improving it by entering the teaching profession and rising up the ranks probably couldn’t have foreseen how all their hard work could eventually be undone by one word.

© The Editor

Website: https://www.johnnymonroe.co.uk/

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?fan_landing=true&u=56665294

Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/807270946

SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW

Bowie 74The back end of the 20th century was fortunate – at least in terms of pop cultural retrospectives – that its musical produce was received by the largest audience; in the memory, therefore, events beyond the Top 40 are often soundtracked by popular song, which can happily enter into a marriage with moments from the wider world in serendipitous synchronicity. However, a febrile era whose songs have proven to be as much of their time as they have subsequently become timeless means a DIY ‘mix-tape’ intended to represent a turbulent period of the past can just as easily speak of the paranoia, instability and uncertainty of the here and now, especially when the here and now’s equivalent has no more impact on the wider world than a ringtone. So, to compile a collection of contemporary tunes reflecting the peculiarly melancholy mid-1970s in 2023 inadvertently sources a soundtrack which says as much about our today as it does all our yesterdays. And here is my track-list…

To open with 10cc’s ‘Wall Street Shuffle’ a week after the perennially precarious banking industry experienced another of its periodical wobbles seems to kick-start the album as it means to go on. Although it deals with no specific crisis, the killer rock riff it owns masks a deliciously sardonic view of the world’s money men, a theme that would grow in its potency as Britain teetered on the brink of bankruptcy within a year or two of the song’s appearance. Track two was never a single, but it stands out as a beautifully bleak tribute to doomed lovers, David Bowie’s ‘We Are the Dead’. Included on his chart-topping 1974 LP, ‘Diamond Dogs’, the song was originally composed for the Dame’s aborted ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ musical, though it fits in with the apocalyptic ambience of the album; possessing a creeping menace that points towards the darker avenues Bowie would explore in albums to come, ‘We Are the Dead’ retains a resonance in our post-pandemic landscape.

Track three is Bryan Ferry’s radical reworking of Bob Dylan’s ‘A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall’; although a defiantly upbeat cover, its lyrics contain some of Dylan’s most vividly nightmarish imagery, and needless to say, the 21st century hasn’t rendered the song irrelevant one iota. Next up is the third hit for Sparks, the icily elegant ‘Never Turn Your Back on Mother Earth’. An odd choice for a single considering its stark contrast with its breathless and bombastic predecessors, this curiously unsettling ballad nevertheless continued to mark the Mael brothers out as uniquely quirky talents. Also capable of quirkiness before he became a teenybop idol, David Essex produced a string of sonically strange singles early on, with track five being the title track from the film in which Essex played a terminally-damaged rock star; ‘Stardust’ sounds like it’s coming live from an empty circus ring and is a further number that captures the hopelessness of one era crawling from the wreckage of another.

Track six is by someone else who divided his time between singing and acting, though in the case of Brian Protheroe, acting won out. A shame, in a way, as ‘Pinball’ was one of the great one-off hits of the decade – a hazy, bloodshot stroll through Soho after-hours that anyone wandering around the alienating bright lights of the big city can relate to, whatever the year. The only track that references a specific year is next – Alice Cooper’s ‘Teenage Lament ‘74’, a song that mines similar themes to the shock-rocker’s breakthrough hit, ‘Eighteen’, though the ambiguous lyrics are buried beneath one of Cooper’s brightest melodies. In contrast, a band renowned for uplifting their audience took the opposite route with track eight; Slade broke their run of top tenners when they released arguably their greatest song, ‘How Does it Feel’ as a single. The memorable opener to their unexpectedly dark biopic of a fictitious rock band, ‘Flame’, the track is a wistful, piano-driven ballad that – despite lyrics laced with hopes of a better tomorrow – cannot help but radiate a potent sadness that perhaps record-buyers didn’t want their favourite Glam Rock party act coming out with. Initially affiliated with the art school side of Glam, Be-Bop Deluxe follow Slade with Bill Nelson’s evocative portrait of parochial ennui, ‘Adventures in a Yorkshire Landscape’, making the listener wonder why this band never made it bigger than everyone at the time imagined they would do.

A detour into decadence comes with The Sensational Alex Harvey Band’s unforgettably filthy cover of Jacques Brel’s ‘Next’, though decadence itself is often a characteristic side-effect of societies trapped in an irreversible decline; indeed, one doesn’t have to look very far to see its presence in our own. Mind you, decadence never sounded quite so wittily perverse as it did in the hands of a man who had begun his career many years before as ‘Scotland’s Tommy Steele’. Track 11 is from The Who, a band still regarded as a yardstick for outrage in the mid-70s, despite Pete Townshend’s fears he had already bypassed the age he once hoped he’d die before he reached. ‘Imagine a Man’ is another of this compilation’s more unashamedly introspective numbers; but by articulating the sense of disenchantment pervading his generation at the time the song appeared in 1975, Townshend was continuing to be as astute an observer of the world around him as he had been ten years previously. And the song still speaks to anyone on the wrong side of 25 – as long as they’ve grown-up a bit.

Another band more celebrated for their riff-heavy rockers than the sensitive side they never shied away from, Led Zeppelin feature as track 12. With the release of double LP ‘Physical Graffiti’ in 1975, Led Zep reached heights they never quite scaled again, and ‘Ten Years Gone’ is one of the album’s highlights; a lament to lost love of a kind that continues to haunt the loser long after the event, the song shares sentiments with ‘Imagine a Man’ in the way it encapsulates mid-life awareness of a road behind that is suddenly lengthening as the road ahead shortens. Track 13 comes from a voice in the wilderness as British pop’s most prominent exile confronts his fears; John Lennon’s candidly paranoid ‘I’m Scared’ is one of his last great statements before the five-year retirement that shortly followed the release of the album on which it featured, ‘Walls and Bridges’. Stripped of the political dogma that had infected much of his immediate post-Beatles output, the song is imbued with a weary vulnerability that was the common currency of the era’s singer-songwriters.

A quartet of singer-songwriters follows ‘I’m Scared’ – John Martyn, Nick Drake, Richard Thompson (with wife Linda) and Roy Harper. All had their roots in – though swiftly transcended – the British folk revival of the 60s, and were amongst the most effective commentators on a period they looked in the face with such intense eloquence. ‘Solid Air’ is perhaps the revered composition of the combative Martyn, whilst ‘Voice from The Mountain’ by Nick Drake is another of his melancholic musings impossible to hear without joining the dots leading to Drake’s premature death not long after. ‘A Heart Needs a Home’ is a fine wine of a ballad from Richard and Linda Thompson that improves with age, whereas Roy Harper’s exquisite version of ‘North Country’ has much in common with Led Zep’s ‘Ten Years Gone’ – ‘I’m wondering if she remembers me at all’.

Harper’s vocal contribution to ‘Have a Cigar’ on Pink Floyd’s 1975 LP ‘Wish You Were Here’ is still a cause of petty resentment on the part of the ever-cheerful Roger Waters, though the album’s title track has a humane heart that has made it one of the band’s most enduring anthems. It seems a fitting piece to close this DIY compilation with – an old song that says something new to each generation that encounters it; when ongoing (not to say tedious) ‘internet issues’ and a general absence of inspiration provoke recourse to default settings, listing such tracks serves as a timely, gap-plugging interlude between heavier topics in sore need of some good tunes. Maybe these will do.

© The Editor

Website: https://www.johnnymonroe.co.uk/

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?fan_landing=true&u=56665294

Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/807270946#

THE DEVIL AND THE DEEP BLACK SEA

Drone MoscowBefore the name became synonymous with an earnest rock band whose ideological offspring have emasculated the genre beyond saving, U2 equated with a US spy plane of the original Cold War era. U2 went from being a mundane military term to a global buzzword in 1960 when the aircraft flown by American pilot Gary Powers was shot down in Soviet airspace during a clandestine surveillance mission. The plane was downed by a surface-to-air missile and the American authorities initially insisted the plane wasn’t a plane but was actually a weather research aircraft – perhaps a bit like those Chinese balloons spotted over the US a month or so ago. However, in one of the great propaganda coups of the period, the Russians paraded Powers (who had parachuted to safety) before the cameras and produced the aerial photographs of military bases the pilot had been dispatched to snap. An embarrassed America was forced to come clean just weeks before President Eisenhower was scheduled to meet Soviet Premier Khrushchev (a summit meeting which was cancelled as a consequence), despite rightly pointing out their tactics were hardly unique at the time – and indeed proved priceless when it came to Cuba a couple of years later; Powers was tried, found guilty of espionage and received a characteristically harsh seven-year sentence before returning home via a prisoner exchange in 1962.

Over half-a-century later, manned missions are no longer necessary for that kind of work, but even their automated successors can run into trouble. Aided by the conflict in Ukraine, relations between the US and Russia are arguably at their lowest level since the days when Gary Powers took his ill-fated flight, and yesterday an American MQ-9 Reaper drone – a small surveillance aircraft – had a too-close encounter with a Russian fighter jet and was last seen plunging into the Black Sea. As is traditional, both sides offer different explanations for the incident and both see the collision as an act of provocation by the other party. A statement from the Pentagon said ‘Our MQ-9 aircraft was conducting routine operations in international airspace when it was intercepted and hit by a Russian aircraft, resulting in a crash and a complete loss of the MQ-9’, before adding the alleged Russian actions could lead to ‘miscalculation and unintended escalation’. Well, that’s something else to help you sleep better at night innit.

The Black Sea itself has been what one might call ‘a hot spot’ since the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea, but the invasion of Ukraine last year has seen an increase in surveillance jaunts over the area; whilst US and UK aircraft hovering around the region have officially remained in international airspace, there’s always the understandable suspicion the odd plane sneaks ‘behind enemy lines’. Russian aircraft are hardly noted for scrupulously observing the rules when it comes to the airspace of a sovereign nation, so it wouldn’t be a great stretch of the imagination to envisage Western aircraft doing likewise. The incident that occurred yesterday was clearly viewed by Washington as deliberate rather than an accident, which implies that if the drone remained in international airspace at the time of the collision, this was indeed the Russians overstepping the mark. This perspective certainly holds sway in the US, resulting in the Russian Ambassador Anatoly Antonov being summoned to provide an explanation; back home in Moscow, however, the state media regarded the presence of the drone as ‘a provocation’. Tit for tat, then.

The Pentagon claims the ‘unsafe, unprofessional’ actions on the part of the Russian aircraft consisted of dumping fuel in the flight path of the drone in a ‘reckless, environmentally unsound and unprofessional manner’, followed by a collision with it that eventually caused it to fall to earth. According to the National Security Council, this incident wasn’t exactly groundbreaking, but it was the most significant to date in terms of damage done. The US didn’t reveal the precise location where the drone landed or if the Russian Navy had embarked on a search for it, but the notion of such sensitive equipment falling into enemy hands is naturally undesirable; it would seem the US used remote pilots to ensure the drone splashed down somewhere in the Black Sea following the collision, which was probably the safest option given the delicate situation, though that doesn’t necessarily mean its secrets are secure on the sea bed. The support being given to Ukraine by the West isn’t limited to providing military hardware, but military intelligence; Kyiv has become dependent on the findings of Western surveillance drones revealing everything from the launching of missiles to the movement of Russian vessels in the Black Sea. It goes without saying that this information going astray wouldn’t help the Ukrainian cause.

Russia, on its part, has demanded the US cease what it refers to as ‘hostile flights’ into Russian airspace; the same Ambassador who was called to provide an explanation for his nation’s actions yesterday, Anatoly Antonov, was prompted to say, ‘We presume the United States will refrain from further speculation in the media space and will stop flying near Russian borders’. There have certainly been some fairly unambiguous indications via Russian state media that the remains of the drone are being actively sought by Russian authorities, though the White House’s spokesman John Kirby has insisted the likelihood of it being recovered – by either side – seems fairly slim. ‘I’m not sure that we’re going to be able to recover it,’ he said. ‘Where it fell into the Black Sea – very, very deep water; so we’re still assessing whether there can be any kind of recovery effort. There may not be.’ Mr Kirby then did his best to affirm that any information the drone contained wouldn’t be much use to Moscow anyway – ‘We did the best we could to minimise any intelligence value that might come from somebody else getting their hands on that drone,’ he added. Two lines from the old Megadeth song, ‘Hanger 18’ now spring to mind – ‘Military intelligence/two words combined that don’t make sense’; Thrash Metal, not known for its profound observations, occasionally delivers the goods.

This incident is clearly not on the same propaganda level as the U2 affair of 1960; for one thing, there is no all-American boy to present as evidence and (as yet) no drone to produce as the next best thing. But it does perhaps highlight yet again the tensions along an international fault-line between East and West that appears as wobbly today as it was 60 years ago. Events in Ukraine and Putin’s persecution complex have combined to create a climate of suspicion and mutual mistrust that has a distinctly chilly whiff of Cold War air about it, with the Kremlin declaring that relations with the US are in a ‘lamentable state’ on the same day that RAF and German fighter jets intercepted a Russian aircraft drifting into Estonian airspace on behalf of NATO. Indeed, sometimes it feels like the Berlin Wall never fell after all.

I suppose a key difference re the West on our rebooted Cold War front is the notable lack of pro-Russian sympathies on this side of the divide. First time round, there were strong Soviet leanings on the Left that ran all the way from university campuses to the grubby backrooms of Trades Union branches; the same attitudes that had turned a blind eye to Stalin’s purges in the 1930s and were strengthened by our alliance with the USSR against Nazi Germany during WWII held firm that Communism was the only alternative to capitalism’s iniquities; even events in Hungary and Czechoslovakia couldn’t shake that conviction. Today, the sole Russians the West courts are exiled oligarchs whilst Putin’s regime is viewed as akin to Hitler’s by all but a few scattered apologists; the popular cause is Ukraine, and Russia is regarded very much as the evil aggressor. A superior state of affairs to those in the past, perhaps; but still very black and white, still very Us and Them – which rarely bodes well for future international relations.

© The Editor

Website: https://www.johnnymonroe.co.uk/

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?fan_landing=true&u=56665294

Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/807270946

A TALE OF TWO AUNTIES

BBC SingersFor those not in the know, the BBC Singers are the UK’s sole professional chamber choir; perhaps lack of competition has enabled this ensemble to remain a revered fixture of the country’s Classical furniture for the best part of a century, but it also means people take notice when such unique BBC employees feel the brunt of their employer’s diminishing commitment to the highbrow. A couple of years ago, it was announced that the BBC Concert Orchestra would be dispatched to the wilds of the provinces as yet another token gesture in the ongoing (and increasingly tedious) operation to make the Beeb less ‘London-centric’; but this week an even more dispiriting sign of these BBC times came with the announcement that the BBC Singers are to be disbanded before the start of this year’s Proms, just a year before reaching their landmark 100th birthday; another penny-pinching body blow to the declining morale of these unsung old retainers was the announcement that salaries for members of the English BBC orchestras will be slashed by 20%.

Axing the BBC Singers was described in one newspaper article as an ‘act of vandalism’; BBC DG Tim Davie was the recipient of a joint letter penned by several Classical luminaries, declaring the intended cuts to be ‘irreversible and catastrophically damaging plans’; the BBC’s response reads: ‘Since 1922 we’ve been an integral part of the Classical music ecology in this country, and in order for us to continue to be a leading force in the industry, we need to modernise, make some necessary and difficult changes to the way we operate to ensure we are responding to audience needs and provide the best possible music to the widest possible audience.’ That statement just stops short of masking its meaning in Birt-speak buzzwords, but bearing in mind the self-destructive path the BBC seems determined to stick to, one wonders if their remaining ensembles will be restructured so that they will henceforth hire not on musical merit, but on box-ticking diversity/inclusivity grounds; perhaps ‘The BBC Rainbow Orchestra’ will eventually emerge from the ashes.

Naturally, the ominous spectre of the licence fee looms over every bumbling move the BBC makes these days as it struggles to justify its existence, and in the process has a habit of forgetting what made it special in the first place. The BBC’s nine musical ensembles may be a legacy of the old Reithian principles that regarded broadcasting as a moral mission to raise the artistic appreciation of the nation, and are viewed by some (especially within the BBC itself) as an anachronistic luxury; yet their continued presence in the face of the relentless dumbing-down that has characterised the Corporation in recent years has been something of a minor victory, particularly when compared to the fate of BBC4, a channel that for a good decade or more was the last remaining bastion of the Beeb’s once-peerless television output.

Now, rather than playing the long game of starving them out, the BBC has instead decided to disband its Singers in the same week as its somewhat kneejerk decision to hand a P45 to a grossly-overpaid star following the latest in a lengthy litany of gormless missives on social media. The fact the Beeb would have happily carried on paying Gary Lineker’s astronomical wages had his current comments on illegal immigrants not landed the Corporation in one more row with the Government that it could desperately do without says as much about its priorities as cutting the salaries of the BBC orchestras. Okay, so BBC TV’s football coverage commands far higher ratings than the listening figures for Radio 3; but we’re not talking about ITV or Channel 5, are we? Isn’t the BBC supposed to amount to more than merely chasing ratings?

Gary Lineker has been a bit of a repeat offender for quite some time; remembering I once wrote a post on here about his Twitter activities, I was surprised to learn when I tracked it down that it had been written as far back as December 2016; in a way, that shows just how long the BBC has tolerated his off-air utterances. As with Jeremy Clarkson before him, it seems the Beeb will allow the front-men of their most profitable franchises to get away with stretching the Corporation’s supposed ‘impartiality’ to breaking point for years until one incident too many provokes enough outraged headlines for a favourite son to be shown the door. I suppose the main difference between Lineker and Clarkson’s positions is that the latter was popular with that section of the viewing public the BBC disdains, whereas the former is a darling of all that the BBC bigwigs hold dear; one suspects they’d been keen to get rid of an embarrassment like Clarkson for years but didn’t dare, whilst losing Lineker was the last thing they wanted. However, unlike ‘Top Gear’ – which has failed to thrive since Clarkson’s departure – ‘Match of the Day’ will survive Gary Linker just as it survived David Coleman, Jimmy Hill and Des Lynam; viewers don’t tune in for the presenter or the pundits; they tune in to watch the games.

From all accounts, the entire commentary team of ‘Match of the Day’ have walked out in solidarity with Lineker; moreover, this Saturday’s edition will have neither presenter nor pundits as it seems Lineker’s sofa mafia have also downed tools and refused to work – although most of them, like Lineker himself, are essentially freelance anyway and routinely turn up on other broadcasters to cover matches the BBC hasn’t got the rights to anymore. Personally, I quite like the idea of ‘Match of the Day’ taking a ‘TOTP 2’ approach to coverage, with no host and no waffling ex-pros endlessly analysing what we’ve just seen. Who knows – it might work as a formula and we’ll be spared the inevitable Alex Scott inheriting the hot-seat. Anyway, as things stand, this move is not being officially regarded as permanent, though it’s hard to see a way back for Lineker with the BBC so terrified of offending a government that wants to take its own shears to the Beeb’s myriad tentacles.

The reactions to the comments that ultimately left the BBC with no choice but to give Gary Lineker the push mirror the polarisation of our times and highlight the dividing lines between those who applaud the compulsion of celebrities to virtue signal and those who deplore them doing so. One side praises Lineker and accuses the BBC of being spineless Tory lapdogs whilst the other claims the freedom the ex-footballer has had to make a mockery of BBC impartiality is symptomatic of the metropolitan Woke elite that forces its arrogant agenda down the throat of a viewing audience sick of being lectured to. Ironically, Piers Morgan, of all people, supported Lineker’s right to express his opinion (even if he disagreed with it) and argued it wasn’t a sackable offence, what with Lineker not being the host of a news programme. The culture wars do indeed occasionally throw up unlikely bedfellows.

It’s interesting that suspending a high-profile presenter of a popular programme provokes an across-the-board ‘everybody out’ attitude not just amongst BBC staff but at the equally PC Premier League, and provides further ammunition for social media soapboxes; it gives the impression that the BBC has been reduced to an ineffective supply teacher unable to exercise any authority over its unruly pupils. On the other hand, when it comes to a corner of the Corporation with a lower profile (albeit one with a far more distinguished history), the BBC can wield the axe unchallenged and protests are limited to the small albeit passionate circle of musicians directly affected. Perhaps these particular BBC employees don’t fit the profile the Beeb is keen to cultivate and consequently aren’t viewed as important – even if their gradual obliteration will do far more long-term damage to the Corporation’s dwindling reputation than the loss of Lineker ever will.

© The Editor

Website: https://www.johnnymonroe.co.uk/

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?fan_landing=true&u=56665294

Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/797932964

WHATSAPP, DOC?

vlcsnap-2023-03-07-16h53m33s534In a way, it would’ve been a breath of fresh air to have been proven wrong, to have had all suspicions and scepticism exposed as ill-founded and to realise our elected leaders were acting out of genuine concern for the people after all. Alas, so engrained now is mistrust of the political class – and not without good reason, lest we forget – that it seems we were destined to have our worst fears confirmed once the private exchanges between those who implemented pandemic policies began seeping out into a mainstream media that slavishly toed the party line at the time. Two or three years later, the MSM has changed direction with the wind and is belatedly engaged in a sequence of double-takes, as though any of these so-called revelations are remotely surprising. In a way, it’s an amusing measure of just how remarkably dim Matt Hancock really is that he entrusted his WhatsApp messages to a Fleet Street snake like Isabel Oakeshott when she was co-authoring his pandemic diaries; true to her nature, Ms Oakeshott proceeded to pass them on to the Daily Telegraph, and now the former Health Secretary’s true thoughts during the period in which he and the Government adopted an approach to civil liberties that Oliver Cromwell would have regarded as a bit extreme are laid bare for all to see. And what an unedifying example of the contempt in which Hancock and his cohorts hold the proles they truly are. And we all thought they cared, didn’t we.

‘Hilarious! I just want to see some of the faces of people coming out of first-class and into a premier inn shoe box.’ That was the reaction of Whitehall mandarin Simon Case to Matt Hancock when the sudden branding of certain countries as ‘red list’ meant any Brit returning from them would have to be quarantined in hotels at the princely sum of £1,750 per person; the notion that these would all be jet-setters returning from skiing holidays is a crude generalisation that distorts the fact that not-so affluent individuals often have to travel abroad to visit family and may well have saved for years to do so. Hilarious indeed. Just how detached Ministers are from the economic realities the vast majority are governed by was further demonstrated in Boris Johnson’s reaction to the news that police crackdowns on ‘lockdown breakers’ had resulted in one specific case of £10,000 fines for two people; Hancock sent the PM the good news, to which Boris replied ‘Superb!’ The fines Boris & Co eventually received for their own spot of lockdown breaking reminded me of similar punishments dished out to Premier League footballers who bring the game into disrepute in that they were hardly likely to plunge those fined into poverty; what of the unfortunate plebs forced to fork out £10,000, though?

As for the instigation of Project Fear itself, whilst TV ad breaks and billboards were flooded with images of masked patients in hospital beds and shops were rationing customers as every available space was plastered with orders posing as advice, Hancock was busily reviewing the success of the campaign on WhatsApp, reminding his media adviser that ‘(We need) to frighten the pants off everyone with the new strain’ before asking ‘When do we deploy the new variant?’ Cabinet Secretary Simon Case evidently knew what worked, stressing ‘the fear/guilt factor (is) vital’. Needless to say, scaring the population into submission wasn’t entirely unprecedented; Project Fear tapped into the global catastrophe narrative in which the end of the world is always nigh; everything from Remainer predictions on the ramifications of Brexit to the elevation of an obnoxious schoolgirl into a secular prophet for the most nihilistic crusade of the age had helped generate widespread insecurities primed to play straight into Government hands. Indeed, one could argue the only competence Boris’s administration showed was in enlisting the obedient compliance of the populace, for in this particular instance the end of the world could be averted if you did as you were told.

Those who expressed grave doubts as to what was being done were criticised at best, demonised at worst, and some were effectively no-platformed, their dissenting voices dismissed as Covid-denying, anti-vax, right-wing extremism; even the respected academics who were the prime signatories to the Great Barrington Declaration – which offered a more humane approach to dealing with Covid that made ring-fencing care homes a top priority – had their reputations blackened and besmirched. The MSM and social media, as well as their Big Tech paymasters, clamped down on any deviancy from the official narrative to the point where few were prepared to air their concerns; and the few that dared to were rapidly silenced, anyway. YouTube and Twitter were censoring freedom of speech like cyberspace Covid Marshals, goose-stepping across hard-fought civil rights that had been one of the achievements of Western civilisation for centuries and grinding them to dust.

Meanwhile, out in the real world the STASI-like encouragement to grass-up one’s neighbours was complemented by drones tracking dog-walkers, and coppers threatening to fine householders sat in their own front gardens if they didn’t go back inside. The employment of virtual curfews, the cavalier destruction of industry and the economy, ruthless pharmaceutical gambling with the lives of the perfectly healthy, the interruption of education and the polluting of infant minds, the outlawing of religious services, the house arrest and solitary confinement of the elderly and mentally ill, the suspension of travelling, the closing-down of sports, hospitality and entertainment venues, and the untold psychological effects of informing people that every step outdoors would kill another granny – all played their part in a period so unnervingly nightmarish that it’s almost hard to believe it actually happened now. But it did, and those that enforced it with their edicts were pissing themselves at the rest of us as they and their pals made a fast buck out of the crisis, snogged their aides, and stopped-off at the off-licence en route to Downing Street.

It’s no wonder so many entombed indoors concluded this was the ultimate conspiracy theory, the culmination of every Great Reset rumour that had been gathering pace for years. One friend of mine bought heavily into the conspiracy theory angle during lockdown and was severely impacted by the concurrent insecurity about where it would lead us; most who know him are convinced it contributed to his subsequent breakdown and radical change of personality. But the irony is, as much as it’s strangely reassuring to believe events beyond our control are being orchestrated by a malevolent global coterie of governments, corporations and so on, the Matt Hancock WhatsApp leaks simply confirm the fact that those pulling the pandemic strings were mainly making it up as they went along; yes, most of them were callous, avaricious individuals who were utterly indifferent when it came to the damage they were doing to the lives of the masses, but they weren’t agents of some SMERSH-like syndicate; they were merely mediocrities who had suddenly been handed the kind of powers they’d never dreamt would ever fall into their hands – not unlike the underachieving nonentities the SS often made commandants of concentration camps; few powers corrupt quite like those given to little men and women who would otherwise amount to nothing.

We also shouldn’t neglect to remember – as we edge towards an inevitable change of government – that opposition parties were even more rabid lockdown fanatics than the heartless implementers of policies whose private personas have finally been made public. Rather than offer a counterbalance to the increasingly draconian legislation the Tories were rushing through Parliament as they became thoroughly sozzled on unlimited power, Labour and the Lib Dems instead offered an alternative that was even more draconian, even more extreme, even more undemocratic, and even more doom-mongering. I suppose they were simply building on the example set before them on the other side of the House. After all, as Matt Hancock said on WhatsApp, fear was ‘vital’.

© The Editor

Website: https://www.johnnymonroe.co.uk/

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?fan_landing=true&u=56665294

Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/797932964

LUNAR TUNES

Dark SideI suppose it’s only natural that a pop cultural age in which recycling is key should find more of interest in its past than its present; the annual roll-call of reissues and anniversaries of yesteryear’s landmark releases has become a Heritage Rock hallmark that exists alongside a glut of contemporary mediocrities without a sole original idea in their heads. And as these 21st century musical magpies freely beg, borrow and steal from the giants upon whose shoulders they squat, consumers are faced with a choice: do they buy into the lame imitation or invest in the original source material? The latter may have a vintage of half-a-century or more, but as the dividing lines between then and now that once used to matter so much to each generation have been whittled away by the Spotify playlist, it seems almost irrelevant that an album like Pink Floyd’s ‘The Dark Side of the Moon’ is 50 years old this week. It sounds as fresh today as it ever did. Just as the exquisite sonic quality of ‘Abbey Road’ has perhaps enabled that LP above all other Beatles releases to sound permanently fresh to every pair of ears that encounters it, the Floyd’s seminal 1973 release has an unprecedented aural clarity that effectively made it the first Compact Disc a decade before CDs hit the market.

Prior to ‘Dark Side’ arriving, the Floyd had made the journey from Psychedelic pioneers who’d enjoyed a fleeting brush with ‘Top of the Pops’ in 1967 to being one of the leading lights in the turn-of-the 70s hippie underground – anonymous hairy antiheroes, shunning showbiz trappings and producing dark, ambient soundscapes that were apparently ideal for rolling your own to. The band’s exhausting touring schedule helped secure their fan-base, and their gradual abandonment of the 7-inch single for the wider vistas of the LP reflected the period when all the celebrated statements produced in pop played at 33⅓. Their commercial fortunes had survived the Acid-induced breakdown, departure and mental decline of their founder Syd Barrett, eventually resulting in their first chart-topping album, ‘Atom Heart Mother’, in 1970 (yes, the one with the cow on the front cover). Like Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd didn’t need to trouble the singles chart or promote their wares by placing photographs of themselves on the sleeves of their LPs. They already had a brand name that sold the music for them.

1971’s ‘Meddle’ was a great leap forward for the band, combining the extended instrumentals for which they had become renowned with a gentle melodic sensibility that was easy on the ears. Side two of the album comprised a solitary track – the dreamy, multilayered epic, ‘Echoes’; it pointed the way to the next album, a record that would elevate Pink Floyd way beyond the lingering remnants of the underground and lift them into the multi-platinum elite of global goliaths. A full year before ‘The Dark Side of the Moon’ was released, they premiered it in embryonic form before an audience at London’s Rainbow Theatre, and carried on playing songs intended for the album on the road for months, honing and perfecting them. Recording of the album spanned a lengthy period from May 1972 to February 1973, sandwiched between touring commitments; and it soon became apparent that the tracks would be thematically linked, with the lyrics possessing a provocative directness that had been absent from their previous releases.

1973 was the year in which ‘Prog Rock’ peaked as the thinking man’s alternative to a mainstream pop scene dominated by Glam Rock and teenybop idols like The Osmonds and David Cassidy. ‘Dark Side’ was the year’s first significant release from an act lumbered with the tag, Mike Oldfield’s ‘Tubular Bells’ followed in the spring, and 1973 closed with Yes’s bloated double album, ‘Tales from Topographic Oceans’ at the top of the LP charts. But ‘Dark Side’ transcended the narrow confines every genre places upon its practitioners and reached audiences who wouldn’t have even heard of Genesis or Emerson, Lake and Palmer. Musically, the record straddles a unique line between impeccably slick musicianship, Musique Concrète-like sound effects, groundbreaking synthesizer experimentation, and loud guitar Rock characteristic of the period; but it never slides into self-indulgence; no instrumental break outstays its welcome and no song goes on too long. With ‘Dark Side’, Pink Floyd achieved a breathtaking balance that blended the deep artistic expression expected of serious creative types in the early 70s with accessible melodies the milkman could whistle. When the album hit record shops in March 1973, it was quickly evident the band had produced a work of art that spoke a universal language to people the world over. Every late 20th century concern that governed millions of post-war lives was condensed into its track-listing; the telling titles of some of those tracks said it all – ‘Money’, ‘Time’, and ‘Brain Damage’.

Even an era in which ‘the concept album’ was so obligatory that the term eventually became an insult never received a statement quite like ‘The Dark Side of the Moon’. It upheld the notion of an LP being much more than merely a collection of unrelated songs to the point whereby picking out isolated tracks feels wrong; it’d be like watching a movie on DVD by simply going straight to favourite scenes. In many respects, it’s the antithesis of the present day habit of iPod swiping. The album has such a cohesive narrative – with each song flowing seamlessly into the next – that one always wants to experience the whole work from beginning to end, as though selecting one number by leapfrogging another would be akin to deliberately skipping a vital chapter in a novel. It may have continued the Floyd’s ability to weave hypnotic sonic tapestries that often made their albums resemble soundtracks to movies that only exist in the listener’s head, refashioning the ‘Space Rock’ elements of their earlier oeuvre via the cutting-edge technology of the 70s; but it didn’t do so by making music that was self-consciously esoteric, the kind of late-night, John Peel excursions into obscurity that would only be of interest to stoned students.

The seductive sound of the album is as melodically irresistible as any of the period’s mainstream pop masterpieces, yet its tracks are segued into one another by employing the more avant-garde process of ingenious sound effects that utilise stereo in a way few artists had done up to that point. Chiming clocks, cash registers, running footsteps, the heartbeat that both opens and closes proceedings, and most of all the disarming snatches of voices that slip in and out of the listener’s ears, create an intense, paranoid atmosphere in synch with the lyrical content. Even session singer Clare Torry’s wordless vocal contribution to ‘The Great Gig in the Sky’, recalling the impassioned, improvised screaming of jazz singer Abbey Lincoln on Max Roach’s ‘Protest’, adds to the overall picture. And, as befitting a time when album sleeves were the great visual artworks of the day, ‘The Dark Side of the Moon’ has one of the most distinctive and memorable, with its simple yet effective portrait of a prism serving as a signpost for the decade.

Few albums demonstrate the old adage that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts than ‘The Dark Side of the Moon’, for the four musicians comprising Pink Floyd – Roger Waters, Dave Gilmour, Rick Wright and Nick Mason – drew on their individual strengths and unified them into one remarkable whole that the bitter, petty bickering of Waters and Gilmour in the decades since suggests can never be recaptured. Waters and Gilmour may not be able to be in the same room as each other today, but when they came together as musicians and communicated via their instruments half-a-century ago, something special happened that we can at least still enjoy all these years later. And 45 million punters since March 1973 have done just that.

© The Editor

Website: https://www.johnnymonroe.co.uk/

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?fan_landing=true&u=56665294

Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/797932964