3rd Minghella Film Festival – King of Rome

14 March, 2011



The 3rd Annual Minghella Film Festival closed last night with a June Tabor concert in the unlikely – but wonderful – venue of Freshwater’s Memorial Hall. (June and her collaborator, pianist Huw Warren, needed a Steinway, and the Mem Hall has one, not to mention an established reputation for world-class concerts.)


June has been part of our family soundtrack ever since she recorded Anthony’s songs for the television version of his play, Whale Music, in 1982. It was such a thrill to have her on the Island and performing live, after nearly three decades of knowing her only through her recordings.


She themed her sets around ideas of the sea and our maritime history – appropriate to the Isle of Wight setting, but also to her latest album, Ashore.


It was a wonderful, transporting night. June doesn’t do frills, in music or in presentation. Her concession to image was a smart black Chinese silky jacket with red trim, but she wore it over what might have been her gardening clothes. On each wrist there was a watch, with the face inside rather than out. Her focus is on unadorned purity and simplicity of sound, and in this there is no lack of passion. At her most intense moments, as for example in her haunting solo King of Rome, she clenches her left fist in apparent pain.


Her voice is one of the most distinctive in English folk, resonant in the lower registers but with a capacity for dainty jauntiness when the mood takes her. Her speaking voice is surprising, almost girlish. She has no interest in being cool. She’ll sing daft ditties by William Makepeace Thackeray. Then she’ll take your breath away with a superb, simple, angry rendition of Elvis Costello’s Shipbuilding.


My favourite, King of Rome – I confess I requested it weeks in advance – tells the true story of Charlie, a pigeon racer from the west end of Derby, who sends his bird to Rome in 1913. On the day of the race, a storm blows in and a thousand birds are lost. Everyone tells him he should have known better. All that land and sea! Charlie says: “Yeah, I know – but I had to try. A man can crawl around, or he can learn to fly. And when you live round here, the ground seems awful near…”


That sense of dreams seeming a long way from coming true chimes with our experience of growing up on the Isle of Wight in the 1970s and 1980s. You looked across at Portsmouth and the mainland and you knew the action was somewhere that way, but never here. Youth was one big wait – for the time to go to college and not come back.


It’s not that we didn’t feel pride in the Island. We did. We felt a deep sense of belonging – to a place distinctive, beautiful and unique. You can’t grow up on the Island and not have the images of its cliffs and bays burned into your brain. You can’t spend your formative summers there without carrying forever the ability somehow to smell the warm red of its local brick. Nettles. 1976. Ladybirds. I can close my eyes any day in London and hear the old SRN6 Hovercraft booming across Ryde sands onto the slipway.


But you always knew you’d be going. And that created a forlorn relationship, not just between generations, but also between youth and home. The story, however idyllic, had tragedy built in. The Victorian shelters on the Esplanade, where small dramas of smoking and snogging were played out in grey off-season drizzle, were hardly “ours” any more than they belonged to summer’s “grockles”. Because we were all visitors in the end. Of all the inhaled images of the Island, the most intoxicating are those connected with arrivals and departures.


King of Rome speaks to me because it is about the need to dream and to act on dreams, however small. The possibility, even the likelihood, of being blown off course, swept away and never seen again. And despite that, the need to try. Anyone who grew up on the Island in that period knows that sensation.


When my brother was young, he used to accompany our granny down to the beach at Ryde, where she used to dream of love returning. Her sad story inspired Anthony to write, and to escape. The ground seemed awful near.


As June Tabor paints her picture of lost dreams, the hairs stand up on the back of your neck. You cannot help but wallow in the inexpressible sadness of it all. “Charlie we told you so. Surely by now you’d know – when you’re living in the west end, there ain’t many dreams come true.”


It comes as such a shock, even if you know the song, that suddenly there’s a wing-flash up in the blue; that the bird, after weeks of battling, has somehow made it back. Charlie come outside quick, he’s perched up on your roof! The King of Rome!



It is fitting, then, that the Film Festival inspired by Anthony happens on the Isle of Wight and not anywhere else. It’s where the dreams are formed that matters, not where they are played out. It’s about returning to the perch, coming home, about knowing where you belong.


If you can pin a life of achievement onto one moment, Anthony’s was perhaps Oscar night, 1997, when The English Patient swept the board. This was a film shot mostly, of course, in Rome. And feted five thousand miles away in LA.


And yet it felt like a homecoming. Nobody thought it was odd, least of all us, when he held his trophy aloft and declared, “this is a great day for the Isle of Wight.”





Putting Humpty Together Again

4th February, 2011


Nick Clegg, speaking on Radio 4’s Today Programme this morning, came out fighting with a “new model” for economic growth.


Or, if not yet a new model, it will be, when they’ve come up with it.  It seems coming up with a plan “is not an overnight job” and “you can’t just put Humpty Dumpty back together again”.


The economy, he argued, needs rebalancing.  It has been overly focussed on financial services.  It has been fuelled by indebtedness.  We’ve had growth “on the never-never”.  It is unsustainable.


I don’t think anyone could argue that it wouldn’t be nice to have more industry and less reliance on services in our economy.  Unfortunately we were deindustrialised by the Tories… but if there’s a way to get manufacturing going again, hurrah.


I don’t think anyone could argue that the private sector is not massively indebted; this is perhaps an unfortunate product of stability and particularly interest-rate stability.  Cheap – reliably cheap – money.  It’s hard not to feel jittery about that as the spectre of stagflation looms.


Trouble is, noticing that we have been over-exposed to the financial sector, or that cheap money has produced an indebted private sector, doesn’t amount to a plan for growth.


Mr Clegg suggests there are four elements to such a plan:


1) to wean the economy off debt-financed growth


2) to invest in infrastructure, skills and education


3) to boost competitiveness by reducing regulation and tax


4) to balance growth across regions and sectors


On 1) (weaning the economy off debt-financed growth) it is hard to square this idea with the constant calls for the banks to lend more to business.  Perhaps consumers are also borrowing too much, with cheap money fuelling a housing boom.  But mortgages are now very hard to get and the housing market is in dire straits.  Whichever way you look at it, debt-fuelled over-consumption seems to be the least of our problems.


On 2) (investing in infrastructure, skills and education) it is hard to see this government investing in anything.  School rebuilding has been abandoned.  Crossrail survived by the skin of its teeth, as did the high speed rail plans.  What new infrastructure might we expect?  Don’t hold your breath, dear reader.  As for “skills and education” the intentions of the Tory-led government are very clear.  They’ve completely withdrawn funding for whole swathes of higher education.


On 3) (reducing regulation and tax) these sound good.  Who likes regulation and tax?  But what does this really mean?  Are we going to reduce regulation of the banks?  I doubt it.  Regulation is there for a reason.


Are we going to reduce tax?  It doesn’t look like we can afford to.  Taxes, in fact, are going up.  Personally I don’t worry about that, because I don’t think slackening the tax regime helps growth.  Investment is driven by the desire for profit.  Spotting the chance to make a buck.  And that needs a vibrant economy – people with money in their pockets, willing to spend.  Sure tax plays a part in determining costs and profit, but if nobody has any money to buy my ice cream, you can cut my taxes all you like, I still have no sales, no profit, no tax.  Costs matter, but demand matters more.  And demand comes first.


On 4) rebalancing the economy, oh, go on then.  Let’s have some industry and not just a service economy.  And let the north thrive.  Might be a good idea to fund some regional development agencies to make that happen.  Oh no – we already have those.  Created in 1998.   Abolished on 22 June 2010. Closing soon.



The Tory-led government believes in the ‘crowding-out argument’ which I have discussed elsewhere in this blog.  When demand drops out of the economy, those who believe in the “crowding out” credo jump into action.  They cut demand even more, by slashing government spending and throwing people onto the dole.    Nick Clegg says, “we can’t just put Humpty Dumpty together again” as if that justified what they are doing to Humpty – namely to kick seven shades of shit out of him. 


The truth is I’m being mischievous when I scrutinize Clegg’s “plan”.  And so is Labour and everyone else who asks the government “where’s your plan for growth?”  Because we all know that the credo cannot allow alternatives.  The deficit reduction drive IS the plan for growth.  The dismantling of the state IS the plan for growth.  The stepping-back of government in order for the private sector to “do its thing” (or not) IS the plan for growth.


There’s no Plan B for Humpty.  We all know that.  Would somebody please tell Nick Clegg?



 

 

 

Women’s Attitudes Towards Men

15th January, 2011


I’ve been sent a home-video copy of my brother Anthony’s play, Whale Music, from 1982.


I know it by heart, and I sing the songs which go with it almost daily.  Nevertheless it’s wonderful to have a copy.


One thing I’d forgotten was how radical it appeared at the time.  For those who don’t know it, it’s a play about a young woman who gets pregnant while at university, and hides herself away in a seaside town to have the baby (which she will eventually give up for adoption).


If unmarried university-years pregnancy were not shocking enough in 1982, the play also offends by having no men it.  It’s all women, and some of those are lesbians.  Another character is a self-confessed maneater, who confesses in a memorable speech to destroying men in bed.


But nowadays this is not noteworthy content, and there’s probably more in-yer-face frankness about sexuality in your average episode of Glee.


So I was quite shocked to hear the viewer warning at the front of this broadcast:


Viewers should know that the play deals with certain women’s attitides towards men in a frank and explicit manner.


I found it hilarious.  Have a listen below.  It’s not just the words of warning; listen to the disapproving tone!  The accent!   It’s more 1950s than 1980s.


The recent furore about Miriam O’Reilly and sexism/ageism in the BBC reminds us there’s still a distance to travel.   But we’ve come a long way, thank heaven, since 1982.


In this track there’s a trailer, then the viewer warning, then the opening music.


Whale Music Trailer 1982



Thank you Eds, Bob and Tom (and Greg)

22nd December, 2010


On 10 December, Ed Balls sent out a link on twitter to an article he’d written about the LibDems serving as a fig-leaf to a radical right-wing government.  Quite right too.


I responded, “@edballsmp Good piece; now pls translate that into action. New PLP rule: don’t mention the LibDems?”


Nine days later:


Ed Miliband has banned the shadow cabinet from using the word “coalition” to describe the government because it sounds too moderate and reasonable, and fails to convey what he says is its true “ideological, rightwing agenda”.

 

In a memo to his front-bench team, obtained by the Observer, the Labour leader’s director of policy, Greg Beales, says that from now on they must use the term “Conservative-led government” to describe the alliance of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.

 

(The Observer, 19 Dec 2010)


Thanks guys.  I’m sure you had that idea independently, but I am happy anyway.   I’ve been arguing for ages that the language of the er, Conservative-led government, has been brilliantly controlled and effective. 


Labour must respond in kind.