Orwell observed how some writers are so important that cultural and political “ownership” of their work is fiercely contested. He said this of Dickens and Shakespeare, so would be delighted that he’s now firmly in that camp. But I think he’d be less happy that the weasel word ‘problematic’ is the cover under which his position is now being undermined – as he’d have predicted, by our censorious ‘progressives’.
To this group, certain writers – Eliot, Pound, Kipling, Celine – are clearly beyond the pale, so that any discussion of them has to be prefaced by an impassioned and often inaccurate lecture on their moral and political failings. There is a sense that this is done as much from the fear of not doing so, especially for Pound. The denunciations are highly performative and follow a script, an observation that could be easily made of much discussion with progressives. They seem to speak nervously and miserably, as if under constant observation. Self-censorship is at work: they feel the need to monitor everything and everyone and so assume this applies to them.
I was subjected to one such lecture by some graduate students, whom I and a good friend were chatting to in an Oxford cafe. One chap was English, the other Italian, both were doing DPhils in Literature. The place is Greek-run and, being half-Greek (though not a speaker), I enjoy its atmosphere and coffee. Indeed, we started talking when I overheard them speaking Greek to the English bloke’s Greek girlfriend.
The students maintained that the important thing is quality of writing but, paradoxically, this can only be judged by a strict contemporary “evaluation” of any Right-wing or outdated views. Inevitably, this contextualisation then reveals that said writers are “problematic” and “not as good as XYZ” – usually some figure who fits their sensibilities, and coincidentally one who’s almost always female – or at least better suited to the diversity required by these commissars.
So far, so well known and wearily familiar. The absolute impossibility of literature under such a mindset – one enthusiastically endorsed by graduate students who professed to live for literature – is utterly depressing. We’re in effect dealing with its cancellation
I made a perfunctory effort in observing their complete inconsistency, but things got more interesting when Orwell was discussed. Of course, Orwell famously wrote against their stand, not least in his brilliant defence of Kipling’s literary merit and his refusal to allow orthodoxy to dictate his aesthetic preferences, in Benefit of Clergy.
Unfortunately, Orwell’s stint in the Burmese Imperial Police made him a despicable figure to the students, little better than a Waffen SS or Gestapo officer. True, he’d belatedly retrieved himself by his “eventual writing” in the 1940s, but he’d spent many years performing the dirty work of the British Empire. His famous essay, A Hanging, showed him enthusiastically hands on at it.
I’d honestly never heard such a narrow and limited view, and was intrigued. As a preposterous misrepresentation, it needs little rebuttal. A Hanging is indeed a brilliantly disturbing account of an Indian murderer being hanged, a man who’d have been executed at that time in any country. The essay explores the deep unease Orwell felt about his role, so it’s a lie to claim it shows him uncritically doing his job, let alone revelling in his exertion of British authority.
Such an interpretation shows a shocking lack of understanding. As does the idea that Orwell only recanted any pro-Imperial views in the 1940s; his underrated Burmese Days was published in 1934 and he wrote extensively about his disgust for the job he did in the late 20s and 1930s. Of course, he didn’t only feel disgust, nor would he pretend that the British brought only misery and were unique as imperial exploiters.
What I’m most interested in is how an alternative Orwell was then offered up, a writer who’d accepted the British Empire was “problematic” yet offered a nice comforting view of how nice and comforting life can be – if you agree with the progressives, that is.
Step forward Jan Morris and his trilogy Pax Britannica. Now, I haven’t read this non-fictional account of the British Empire but from background knowledge, it’s not in any way a replacement for Orwell or even remotely comparable. It’s an exhaustive historical work, not a personal creative one. But this trilogy was extolled by the students as what Orwell should have done when discussing empire. There was the implication that Orwell could now be – somewhat thankfully – ignored.
Bizarrely, the Englishman then introduced Joyce, first saying that the man was a lifelong sponger who’d have probably fleeced him, but as a writer was the very model of a pan-European, liberal and open to all cultures. Again, the grubby contradictions and sheer banality of such a perspective are eye-popping – from a DPhil student in perhaps the country’s finest university.
And I’ve a nagging feeling that Jan Morris – a famous case of gender realignment (he ‘transitioned’ to female in 1972) – was picked for the ‘acceptable author’ reasons. That’s the problem with ‘author context’ vetting – as with ‘diversity hires’. Much as I’ve enjoyed Morris’s travel writing, especially Oxford, it’s staggering for this author to be proposed as some alternative to Orwell! Not only in terms of obvious lesser importance, but they’re not remotely comparable in terms of genre or aims. How could any serious reader – let alone one at a leading university – talk such gibberish?
Discussion on Pound and Eliot was even more absurd. Both were (begrudgingly) great poets, but it was impossible to read either without a thorough warning of their antisemitism – the Italian seemed to think this was a safety requirement. He had no faith in any reader simply reading a text, whilst disingenuously claiming to believe that anything worthwhile would always survive on its own merits. If someone genuinely feels this, then why the need for all the Health and Safety proclamations? It’s the pathetic unwillingness to be honest I most despise – why not just say “I want Eliot to neither be read nor survive”?
Pure funk – he’d be afraid someone would accuse him of being a philistine, as Eliot’s status is near-unassailable. I say “near”, since these people are – though they’d never admit to it – really working on that. So, just be honest about it!
Needless to say, discussion then moved on to the Rhodes statue at nearby Oriel College, which both DPhils were adamant had to be removed. It was easily as disturbing to “victims of British imperialism” as any supposed hurt caused by Gaza protest chants of “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” to Oxford’s Jewish students. Anyway, the English chap maintained, Jewish students (of which he wasn’t one) mostly approved of the protests, since only two had signed a petition in Balliol approving Israel’s actions.
“I wonder how those brave souls felt?” I asked. “I thought minorities were the key to all this?”
The Englishman – in fact, a pseudo-European intellectual – lovingly informed me that he could sniff out a fascist, and only one course of action could then follow.
Some stirring words from Lorca on the Spanish Civil War were recited.
I should have quoted Nietzsche – but presumably he’s problematic and a fascist?
He who fights with monsters best take care lest he himself becomes the monster.
Paul Sutton can be found on Substack. His new book on woke issues The Poetry of Gin and Tea is out now.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
This country is lost. The institutions that we were brought up to respect, the police, the courts, the fire service, the NHS, and the government have abandoned the citizens who fund them in favour of the woke ideology of deranged activists.
https://youtu.be/1-QfgQQkGJU
Saint Neill Oliver!
Cracking song he refers to:-
https://youtu.be/uqdJsRWN1Y4
What if a pretend woman says she has got his little man caught in her zip, but he has not come on his period yet and her little man has lost a bit of male chromosome blood but she has stemmed this with his rugby sock ?? Poor ambulance crew.
World gone to hell in an ambulance.
One person story !! One person
Just how have a minority achieved the unachievable…
Financial support
“Hallo – emergency services”
“I’m having a heart attack!”
“What pronouns shall we address you by?”
“Eh? Whatever. Look, it really hurts… I’ve got a crushing pain in my chest and the pain runs all the way down my arm and up into my jaw. I’m at 62 West Wallaby Street…”
“Calm down Sir, I just need to get it straight how I should refer to you.”
“Sir? Straight? You bastard! I’d rather die. <click>”
My reply would be “I don’t care if you call me a c**t, just get an ambulance here as quickly as possible”.
Their reply would probably be “Our ambulances are currently being repainted in pride colours and the electric ones need more time to charge their batteries. We’ll see you next Tuesday”.
“see you next Tuesday” – quite.
Answer came there none.
How many trans patients per day are in need of the services of the ambulance people?
See what I did there?
Your Majesty, Your Highness, Those are my preferred. I Identify as Royalty and expect to be addressed as such. Tomorrow I might Identify as a Brain Surgeon and pop into the local hospital to perform a couple of Ops, and nobody can say I am not, if they do they are committing a hate crime against me, I will demand reparations for any suffering caused, Its my truth,
I reckon you can trace the self identification concept back quite far. It started when the judges and police etc called themselves masons and master masons. I bet none of them can wield a chisel or make anything!
Goes back way further than that, this (and many things occurring globally) originats from the Talmud.
Talmudic… The 8 genders…
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-eight-genders-in-the-talmud/
Judaism has recognized nonbinary persons for millennia.
But Judaism never had gender self-identification.
Manifestation
So, I’m laying on the ground following a heart attack or motoring accident; maybe I fell off a ladder and what I need most of all is the correct gender pronoun.
For the tiny numbers who might genuinely prefer to be addressed other than implied by the name they give the rest of us are to increase the risk to our health and maybe our lives caused by additional delay.
Just remember this has all come about under the Tories. Vote them out at the next GE. Their pronoun is “Failure”.
Batshit Crazy is the order of the day for everyone!
Operator “I don’t care if it is an emergency, if you don’t tell me your preferred pronoun I am cutting you off”
“I’m a man who identifies as a woman, it would be great if you could cut it off.”
What is wrong with using peoples first names..? You don’t need pronouns if you use names.
Is a 999 call situation really the best time to actively distract a panicking person with woke questions? I think that operators are going to hear the phrase “What?!? What do you [insert expletive] well think??!!??
In this mind numbing drive to cover every single base on every single occasion, in every instance, in every conceivable situation, with every possible human interaction, we have twisted society into knots that cannot ever be untied.
“Inappropriate pronouns do cause stress and may make an already difficult situation worse.”
Oh My Good God. Stressed by “inappropriate” pronouns? Only if you’re a whiney, neurotic, self-obsessed, entitled and desperately confused weed in need of psychiatric help.
That so many institutions, public and private, have submitted to this solipsistic crap is very, very sad. I thank God that I don’t have too much longer to put up with what this world has become, so quickly; I do worry though about how my poor autistic son, with his disarmingly black-and-white way of perceiving the world, is going to avoid having his collar felt by the Thought Police…
I’m sick to death of this b0ll0cks. Why on earth should we have to pander to the delusions of a tiny number of mentally ill people and the trans-activists?
So if your preferred pronoun is sir (or madam) and they’ve been told not to use those words, how does that work?
Having to exercise caution over how one addresses a caller may cause hesitancy in processing the call. This hesitancy could prove to be fatal where precious seconds matter. The silver lining, however, could be that surely over 90% of people would instantly see the absurdity in asking one’s pronouns in an emergency, and perhaps it will be a wake up call for many, demonstrating the extreme to which wokery has gone,