terça-feira, 24 de dezembro de 2024

The Spectator - London is getting worse

 

(personal underlines)

London is getting worse

Goodbye to the good-time capital

(iStock)

A famously elitist members’ club, a 900-year-old meat market, and a traditional old barbershop may not feel like they have much in common. In fact, they didn’t – not until the last week or two, when they all simultaneously closed in their disparate parts of London. The first closure, that of the Groucho Club, has been widely covered in these pages, generally with an overtone of chortling. After all, it is hard to feel sorry for a place that is notoriously exclusive, boasts a world-class art collection, and charges members £1,500 a year for the privilege of eating near a Damien Hirst – or indeed eating near Damien Hirst.

And yet, as a long-standing member, I will robustly defend the Groucho. Because it is fun. Because it opens late. Because it has been around for decades. Because that art collection is magnificent and soothing. Because – yes, if you can afford it – the Groucho wants you to enjoy yourself. And because it’s a pivotal part of Soho which is potentially closing for good (inshallah, the Groucho survives). Soho is a crucial part of what makes London London. And it is all of London that feels like it is declining, changing for the worse, even dying.

Take the second closure, the meat market. This, of course, is Smithfield in Farringdon, which has been butchering pigs, filling sausages, and swinging cow carcasses like dead gangsters in a Scorsese movie since the time of Henry II. For evidence of how old Smithfield is: if you’ve ever wondered why the pavements of Islington are so weirdly elevated, it is because, centuries ago, they were raised above the dung and mess created by the herds of livestock trampling down to Farringdon’s Gate of St John.

Now, after nearly a thousand years of meat cleavers, burly porters, 8 a.m. pints of Guinness and decades of that brilliant clash between sleek, rich, chic financial London and ruddy, visceral, malty, offal-and-oatmeal London, the market is to shut its oddly delicate Victorian gates forever. Appositely, it will be replaced by a museum: the Museum of London.

And what about that third closure? It is, yes, just a barbershop. But it is my barbers, on the rugged Primrose Hill borders. I’ve known it for yonks, and the amiable boss could make my hair presentable in 16 minutes. Now he’s gone, and one reason he’s gone is the competition from approximately seventy billion ‘Turkish barbers’, which line the streets near me en masse, only outnumbered by vape shops with fascias so garish they would be rejected in Nairobi as unsuitably vulgar.

But am I imagining this whiff of wider decline, and narrowing, even death? Let’s focus on the nightlife, because there we have stats. Between 2020 and 2023, more than 3,000 of London’s ‘night economy businesses’ closed their doors. At the same time, dozens of nightclubs have vanished – Tiger Tiger to Madame Jojo’s. Even sadder for a world city with a great drinking culture, London pubs are shuttering at a faster rate than anywhere in Britain.

Of the pubs that do remain, they face ever more hostile councils and busybodies. The Sekforde pub in Clerkenwell opened in 1829. Now its neighbours have complained so fiercely about the jolly sound of evening drinkers, this historic boozer risks losing its licence. Perhaps the curtain-twitchers should have considered the prospect of street chatter when they bought a house next to a pub? And the Sekforde is hardly unique. Add staffing problems and the cost-of-living crisis, and it is not uncommon to find pubs in central London closing at 9 p.m. or not opening for half the week.

Underlying demographic trends are also, of course, at work. Take London boroughs like Tower Hamlets and Newham, which are now 40 per cent and 35 per cent Muslim respectively. As Muslims don’t drink, it is unsurprising that the pubs in these areas have closed even faster than elsewhere. At the same time, younger people – of any religion, or none – are much less likely to drink than their hog-whimpering parents. Around a quarter of 16- to 24-year-olds don’t drink at all.

Personally, however, I can’t help feeling that the disappearance of good-time London, its slide into depression, even intimations of death, must also be linked to political leadership. After all, for a decade London has been led by a beige, joyless, teetotal homunculus, a man so dedicated to Not Having Fun he bans bikini ads from the Tube.

Mayor Sadiq Khan has also, until recently, been assisted by one Amy Lamé, who was paid up to £130,000 as Night Czar. And what happened under the reign of the capital’s Night Czar? Well, almost 1,000 bars and clubs in London have closed, for a start. Maybe the Night Czar should have been called the Early Evening Czarina, or even the Sultana of Stay Home, Then We Won’t Be Stabbed.

We have a new PM, too, the Honourable Member for Anhedonia, who makes Khan look like Falstaff crossed with a young Elton John. For Keir Starmer (who doesn’t dream, never eats meat, cannot name a favourite book, poem nor Christmas movie), a ‘good time’ is becoming prime minister just so that he and his wife can grift some free designer saucepans – like one of those rich middle-aged couples who can’t wait to book into a struggling historic three-star hotel just to steal the tiny soaps and hand towels.

So, yes, London is more depressing than it was. No getting round it. But as a Londoner, I refuse to yield to despair – or to any sense of death. Why not? Because it is London. It is the Smoke, it is the city that survived the Black Death and the Blitz, the Great Fire and Gordon Brown. When I climb Primrose Hill at dusk, I can look out over a skyline that simply did not exist 40 years ago. Some of the new skyscrapers are gauche and ugly, but some are glorious.

There are also solid reasons for optimism, amidst the darkness. London is easily the best city in Europe for start-ups (‘despite Brexit’), indeed it is second only to New York, globally. London also boasts more tech unicorns (new tech companies worth over £1 billion) than any city in Europe. And, fundamentally, London’s young population is growing, fast. There are good reasons to dislike the changes that can come with this, but on a basic level a growing population is much better than the opposite. New York City, for instance, is shrinking.

As for my own personal feelings, when I heard that my barbers was gone, I stomped down to the high street in a huff – and I went to one of those Turkish gaffs. Inside, the guy gave me an excellent cut, told a funny deadpan joke (‘That will be £90, Sir’), burned the hairs off my ears, and I was out within 15 minutes. So it turns out I found a good new barber quite quickly. In the same spirit, I believe London will throw off her sulks, her glooms, and her grey politicians, and she will return. She always does.

The Spectator - cartoons

 








Teatro - Música no Coração





Em 11.12.2024, pelas 15, e mais tarde pelas 21h, estreámos no Teatro Joaquim Benite, o musical "Música no Coração", depois de não termos podido estreá-la antes, devido ao problema  de "direitos de autor". Houve algumas pessoas, que eu não tinha avisado, que mais tarde confessaram ter visto o espectáculo e ter-me reconhecido. Isto para além do Joaquim Figueira e da Teresa do Coro da Ordem dos Engenheiros, do Carlos Andrade e do Luis, de diversos casais da Hidro.

Em baixo com o encenador, o Diogo Novo.









Séries - Não me abandones

 Uma série italiana sobre o rapto de crianças, passada em Veneza.





Reflexão - Grupo de Fontanelas (Zé Carlos "Bojardas")

O Zé Carlos faleceu em 17.12.2024. A mulher pôs um post no Watsup, no grupo de Fontanelas que eu "tive a iniciativa de lançar" já há uns anos.

O Zé Carlos, creio que foi um dos primeiros conhecimentos que tive em Fontanelas. Tinha uma moradia mesmo em frente da casa da Tia Ana, uma preta adorável a quem arrendávamos a casa durante os verões entre, creio, 1968 e cerca de 1972 ou 1973.

Foi em casa dele, mas em Lisboa, que tenho uma das recordações mais presentes da minha adolescência: ouvir o "Lola" dos Kinks, um single que ele tinha.

Lembro-me perfeitamente do pai e da mãe dele. E de algumas  das histórias que ele contava, fosse com o Zé Luis Trancoso, fosse com o Zé Rosales.

O Paulo Santos e o Tó Zé sempre foram mais próximos dele do que eu, tanto mais que a convivência se iniciou muito mais cedo.  

Na nossa fase da adolescência, o Zé acompanhava sempre mais o Zé Luis Trancoso.

Fica a memória. Que raio!

                                                                




                                                                Zé e Pedro Teixeira


As mães do Zé Luis e do Zé Carlos, com eles

O Paulo, o Zé Carlos e o Tó Zé

O Tó Zé, o Paulo e o Zé Carlos

O Tó Zé, o Zé Carlos e o Paulo

O Zé Carlos e o Zé Luis
E, o Zé
























The Spectator - The police have given up on actual crime

 (personal underlines)


The police have given up on actual crime

What do you do if you can’t solve crime? For the police in this country – as in many other western countries – the answer is obvious. You police non-crime.

The fact that our police do not police crime is not my view. It is a fact. Recent figures have shown that they currently fail to solve 90 per cent of reported crimes. Put into real numbers, that is 6,000 criminals every day getting away with serious offences. In 2022 that included 30,000 sexual offences, 320,000 violent crimes, 1.3 million thefts and over 310,000 cases of criminal damage and arson. Or to put it still another way, only 6.5 per cent of crimes led to a charge or court summons, while 2.2 million cases were dropped because no suspect was found.

Some areas of the country manage to beat even this record. As I mentioned a few weeks ago, in the past three years police forces have failed to solve a single burglary in half of all neighbourhoods in England and Wales. Not one. Nada. Zilch.

So what are they reduced to doing? Why, policing language of course. As the great Mark Steyn has said, our societies in the West have ended up policing everything except crime. As he knows.

Take a phrase I was introduced to only this week: ‘tragedy chanting’. This is one of those new phrases used as though they are familiar terms. It is also the offence with which two Manchester United fans were charged with after an FA Cup match against Liverpool. Following the arrests, Chief Inspector Jamie Collins said that Greater Manchester police ‘will clamp down on this and arrest those who engage in such behaviour, regardless of what team they support’. You could observe that a force which fails to distinguish itself during actual tragedies might disproportionately incline to policing ‘tragedy chanting’ as some kind of recompense.

The Liverpool police have form in this area too. A few years back 19-year-old Chelsea Russell was visited by officers, issued with a community order and given an 8 p.m. to 8 a.m. curfew for two months. The offence was that Chelsea posted on Instagram a lyric which included the ‘n-word’ from Snap Dogg’s celebrated work ‘I’m Trippin’ ’. She apparently intended it as a tribute to a friend who had just died in a road crash, and whose favourite song this was. And while you or I might disagree with Chelsea’s or her late friend’s choice, I am not certain that anyone’s musical taste should be an arrestable offence. But the police in Liverpool thought otherwise.

So it isn’t just Scotland that’s engaged in policing these strange new offences. It is forces across the UK. Recent figures show that in just one year, 3,300 people were detained and questioned about things they had said on social media. Last November, for example, the Met arrested a man for a post in which he criticised the number of Palestinian flags flying from lampposts in his area. There’s also the recent prosecution of Sam Melia, whose crimes included putting up stickers which said ‘It’s okay to be white’ and ‘Reject white guilt’. We have yet to learn whether it is a crime in Britain to put up stickers saying ‘It’s okay to be black’ or ‘Reject black guilt’. The most egregious of his stickers asked ‘Why are Jews censoring free speech?’ Yet marching at a Palestine demonstration waving a placard saying media is ‘controlled by Zionists’ does not – as with Mr Melia – result in a charge of incitement to stir up racial hatred and a two-year prison sentence.

It is a dangerous game that the police are playing: lean on one lever overzealously the better to keep the peace. This is why the brave Iranian man who turns up to Palestinian demonstrations in London with a sign saying ‘Hamas is terrorist’ is terrorised not only by the peaceful attendees of the peaceful marches, but by the police too. It doesn’t do to state British government policy amid a peaceful march, does it? It might inflame opinion among the peaceful attendees.

The same is happening all over the West. Earlier this month a new Holocaust museum was opened in Amsterdam. A protest against it was arranged by Palestinian activists, ostensibly because the ceremony was going to be attended by Isaac Herzog, the President of Israel (and son of British second world war hero Chaim Herzog). At the service in the nearby synagogue, attendees could hear the chants of their opponents outside. Footage of the day includes images of Holocaust survivors, with their grandchildren, walking past screaming protestors.

In response, the Dutch comedian Hans Teeuwen made a video which he posted on social media lampooning the mayor of Amsterdam for allowing such scenes to happen in the city. Wearing a funny wig, he did a biting impression of her saying that sometimes you have to break a few eggs and Jewish hearts in order to make a nice diverse and inclusive omelette. At the end of the sketch, as the camera pulled away, there was an air gun on the table, a satirical reference to the fact that the mayor’s son was found a few years ago with a disabled firearm belonging to his father.

Within two hours, six police turned up at Teeuwen’s door claiming they were investigating reports of a firearm. The idea that he was posing any kind of risk to the public was preposterous, and Teeuwen treated it as such, telling the police that they could take the toy gun and give it to the mayor’s son as a reminder of the shame she’d brought on Amsterdam by refusing to let the opening of a Holocaust museum proceed with dignity. The police suggested that he was lucky that they hadn’t broken his door down. ‘Aren’t you just a little bit ashamed of this?’ Teeuwen asked them when they finally left.

But that’s the state of things in the West. If you can’t control the mobs and you can’t control the criminals, why not try to control everybody else?

The Spectator - The Oxford Union has disgraced itself

 

(personal underlines)

The Oxford Union has disgraced itself

The Oxford Union's debate on Israel descended into chaos (Alamy)

The chamber of the Oxford Union, that once-proud institution, has been breached by the forces of bigotry, hatred, and mob rule.

Invited to speak against an anti-Israel motion, I attended with three colleagues, each bringing unique expertise and experience to the room. But what unfolded on Thursday night was not a debate at all. It was an assault on the very principles the Union once claimed to uphold, presided over by organisers who behaved more like a mafia than custodians of an august society dedicated to free speech.

This was an extremist mob dressed up like a wolf in black tie

The motion for debate was itself a grotesque provocation: “This House Believes Israel is an Apartheid State Responsible for Genocide.” Apartheid and genocide are not just loaded terms; they are distortions when applied to Israel, as I planned to explain in my speech. That the Union had decided to frame this debate around them was bad enough. It had caused some to decline their invitation to speak at all. But the problems were much deeper rooted even than students seeking attention through sensationalist wording.

This wasn’t an evening for intellectual rigour or balanced argument. From the very beginning, it was clear the organisation of this event was deeply and worryingly dishonest, aggressive and one-sided. Speakers infamous for their unhinged views were invited to confront us; we were left in the dark about who had been invited on our side. Deception and dishonesty characterised the entire run-up to the debate. 

When the day finally arrived, the atmosphere in the chamber was hideous, sinister, and suffused with tension. Jews who might have attended were clearly too afraid to show up: many had written to me privately to tell me of their fears. In a packed chamber, I identified four Jewish students who sat huddled together across from me, but soon realised there were unlikely to be many more present. When I acknowledged them with a thumbs-up, they returned the gesture with a heart symbol: a fleeting moment of solidarity in what was otherwise an unrelentingly hostile environment.

The tone was set long before the debate began. The president of the Union, Ebrahim Osman Mowafy, an Egyptian Arab, seemed to me to be openly biased from the outset. His behaviour throughout the evening was not that of a neutral chair but of an orchestrator, stacking the odds against the opposition and fostering an environment of unchecked hostility. In the end, perhaps his most disgraceful speaker against Israel withdrew, seemingly intimidated by the strength of the team we had managed to assemble despite the Union’s best attempts to stop us. Having been told a student would take his place, we found out only on the night that Osman Mowafy himself would forgo the traditional impartiality of the chair’s role and speak against us himself.

At the pre-debate dinner we were completely ignored by the president: the vibe felt decidedly more like Mean Girls than Brideshead Revisited. Meanwhile, after cancelling the traditional pre-debate group photo altogether, Mowafy posed alone for private snaps in the chamber with the anti-Israel team, beaming like a Cheshire cat in white tie. As we entered the chamber itself, I reached out to shake hands with the opposing speakers. All but one refused the gesture.

From the moment the debate began, the crowd displayed its unbridled hatred towards us. Aware that tickets had been tightly controlled ‘for security reasons,’ we soon felt it has been to decrease our security. As I rose to speak, the mob of a crowd pointedly giggled and coughed to show their animosity. Their interruptions grew louder and more vicious as I progressed, culminating in a young woman standing and screaming obscenities in my face like a banshee: “Liar! F*** you, the genocidal motherf***er!” It took an intervention from me to finally prompt the president to have her removed. Even then, it seemed that he did so begrudgingly, as if I had overstepped the mark by expecting basic order.

This was not an audience interested in debate or even in hearing arguments. It was a baying mob, openly hostile and emboldened by the president’s refusal to enforce the most basic rules of decorum. They interrupted every pro-Israel speaker with jeers, coughs, and outright abuse. Mosab Hassan Yousef, the son of a senior Hamas founder and leader who defected to Israel’s side and saved countless lives, was met with jeering derision and cried of “traitor” and “prostitute” (in Arabic), as he recounted his extraordinary story of moral courage and bravery. In a genius move, after explaining his choice to report information of forthcoming suicide bombing attacks over ten years to the Israelis he asked the audience to indicate by a show of hands how many of them would have reported prior knowledge of the October 7th massacres. The vast majority of the room remained still. Here was an Oxford Union audience which would have buried its head in the sand over the barbaric Palestinian terrorism of that dark day, without trying to prevent it at all.

Yoseph Haddad, an Israeli Arab who has dedicated his life to dismantling the apartheid lie, faced similar treatment. The international law commentator Natasha Hausdorf was hectored to finish her speech far quicker than her proposition counterpart.

Meanwhile, the proposition speakers trafficked in unforgivable and dangerous rhetoric. Miko Peled, a relentless anti-Israel activist, described the atrocities of 7 October as acts of “heroism.” I presume that includes the slaughter and kidnap of babies. 

Novelist Susan Abulhawa demonised Jews as foreign colonisers, claiming their true homeland lay in Europe. Her later post on X branded me and Natasha “white colonisers”. 

Mohammed El-Kurd, in the mode of a moody teenager, peddled unverified claims of Israeli atrocities to cheers from the crowd, and then flounced out as soon as he had finished his speech. All the while, the president sat unmoved, in my view, permitting this orgy of hate to continue unimpeded, as members of the audience cursed us in Arabic and disrupted the proceedings. This was an extremist mob dressed up like a wolf in black tie.

By the time the motion passed – 278 in favour to 59 against – it was clear that the entire event had been a sham. This was not a debate; it was a show trial, it seems to me, orchestrated by a deeply biased president and cheered on by a mob that had no interest in facts or truth.

This felt like a marker, the moment when the Oxford Union truly fell. Not just as a debating society, but as a symbol of intellectual freedom. The room that night was not filled with future leaders engaging in the battle of ideas; it was a mob baying for blood, intolerant of nuance, and utterly resistant to the values the Union claims to uphold.

The Union has long been a proving ground for ambition, a training ground for those destined to lead. But if this is the intellectual and moral climate shaping the leaders of tomorrow, then the implications are chilling – not just for the Union, but for society at large.

As we swept out of that chamber of horrors after midnight, we escaped down a side alley marked ahead of time for us by our security team, past a gay nightclub with youngsters spilling out in skimpy vests and crop tops. Did these carefree, liberal partygoers know of the horrors just the other side of the wall, of the decline of a once respected institution of intellectual debate into a chaotic, morally compromised shadow of its former self?

As our driver sped us out of Oxford, my colleagues and I compared notes about what we had just experienced: it was no less than the fall of the Oxford Union.

Reflexão - As presidenciais

 Começou a cantilena, perdão, a "corrida". Mas, será que ninguém se enxerga?? Ao que chegámos.

Ah, e ainda falta o "Pestana". Não a abram, não...




Tertúlias - Escola Alemã (jantar)

Em 19.12.2024, jantar da turma da Escola Alemã, no Império, com João Tatá, Pedro Gomes, João Leite, Carlos, Vasco Costa, José Magro, José Borges, eu, Carlos Medeiros e José Rato.










Cartoons - The spectator

 





















sexta-feira, 13 de dezembro de 2024

Livros - The life and death of Hitler's spymaster

 It is always a pleasure to read, in English, a biography of one of the least known persons of the IIWW.

And also to remember, ultimately, who gave the orders to act in Portugal...



Series - Anónimo

 


Youtube - Talking with docs (Why You Should Be Eating Garlic EVERY DAY!)

 





The Spectator - What’s sadder than an ageing rocker?

 (personal underlines)


What’s sadder than an ageing rocker?

It’s time for Jagger et al to retire

The Rolling Stones in 2022 (Getty)

‘Old soldiers…’ they used to say, ‘never die. They simply fade away.’ What a shame that the same can’t be said of old rock stars. The old codgers can’t be cajoled, shamed or otherwise persuaded to kindly leave the stages they have profitably adorned for half a century or more.

This unworthy thought came to me the other day as I watched 75-year-old Bruce Springsteen creakily strutting his stuff at a campaign rally for cackling Kamala. I have been a fan of the Boss since the 1970s when the perceptive critic Jon Landau dubbed him ‘the future of rock and roll’. But now that he has become the past of rock and roll, Brucie and his fellow rocker OAPs should hang up their guitars and sweaty jeans and prepare to the great recording studio in the sky.

Springsteen’s angst-ridden hymns seemed to suit the spirit of an anxious age – hymns to urban hard-scrabble American youth, racing their Chevvies in the summer streets, always menaced by unemployment, the mob, unwanted pregnancies and the decay of young lust into marital misery. But what is appropriate for a skinny young dude wondering from where his next meal or lay is coming looks absurd now that the Boss is a multi-millionaire long-married man, more worried about replacing hips and knees than getting girls to dance.

Rock is a young person’s game. Its sounds, lyrics and themes are all about the joys, insecurities and embarrassments of youth. Isn’t it ridiculous, odd, or even faintly obscene for octogenarian wrinklies to still be belting out songs about not getting satisfaction when they are on their third marriage and forty-fourth world tour?

Springsteen is hardly alone in his reluctance to call it a night. A whole roster of rockers are still just about raving. The Rolling Stones, Van Morrison, Bob Dylan, the squabbling remnants of Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin, and a host of other fading stars of yesteryear are still, in Dylan’s words, ‘out on the road’ when they should be tucked up in bed with a nice mug of Horlicks. They are pretending to suffer the pangs of unrequited young love when their contemporaries are more concerned about getting a GP’s appointment or losing their winter fuel payments.

I have only seen the Stones perform once: many years ago at the Knebworth Festival. Jagger, who was then, I guess, in his late forties, was skipping around the stage like a cheetah on heat or speed, with the enviable energy of a 14-year-old. His zoom may come from being the son of a PE teacher, or it could be because, contrary to his carefully calculated wild-man image, Mick actually lives a conservative lifestyle of moderation that explains his perfectly preserved physique and his willingness to go through the same old numbers and, aged 81, hitch his hips for the umpteenth time. Either way, the old rogue and his band mate frenemy Keith Richards, aka ‘the man that death forgot’, seem to have found a formula for defying age.

Or is it simply that the Stones and other members of their antiquated generation actually enjoy what they do and see no reason to stop? Their equally aged fans are as ready to fork out astronomic sums for tickets to hear their croaky concerts as they were to scrape together the pennies to purchase vinyl 45s in their distant youth. So who am I to play the spoilsport and point out the incongruity of such geriatric oldsters warbling about fancying teenagers?

My lifelong rock hero, Jim Morrison of the Doors, had the good taste to die at 27, the same dangerous age that claimed the lives of Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Brian Jones, Amy Winehouse and Kurt Cobain. Jim, a notorious lush, either breathed his last in the bath of his Paris apartment or expired from a heroin overdose in a nightclub toilet, depending on which story you believe. That, it seems to me, is a more fitting end for a member of his ephemeral profession, the celebrants of drink, drugs, fast cars and living on the dangerous edge of things. Certainly it is more aesthetically congruent than staggering on for decades before finally conking out between the sheets, not of sexual excess, but of some smelly disease.

‘Hope I die before I get old,’ sang Pete Townshend of the Who in 1965 in ‘My Generation’. Mr Townshend clearly had second thoughts about that, as he is still happily with us at a venerable 79. But the band’s drummer Keith Moon did die, aged 32, after a brief career spent abusing booze and pills, kicking holes in expensive drum kits and trashing hotel suites – on one occasion blowing up a bathroom with a stick of dynamite. 

Such self-destruction is sad for the stars and their families, and it is clearly an irresponsible way to behave, but isn’t rock supposed to be irresponsible? Maturing quietly and gently may be difficult when bawdiness and irreverence is all you’ve known, but it is better by far than posing as a horny adolescent while heading for a care home.

The Spectator - What a remarkably bad electric guitar player Bob Dylan is

 

(personal underlines)

What a remarkably bad electric guitar player Bob Dylan is

I have rarely known anyone – certainly not anyone charging on the door – play with such careless conviction

Bob Dylan in 2009. Photo: Harry Scott / Redferns

Finally, a taste of the authentic Bob Dylan live experience. On the two previous occasions that I’ve seen Dylan, in the early 2000s and again two years ago, he was disappointingly well-behaved for a man with a reputation for operating a scorched-earth policy towards his catalogue.

Once upon a time, seeing Dylan live was a high-wire activity. Those days are long gone, but on the second night of two shows in Edinburgh, some little wildness crept back in. During the opening pair of songs, which were gradually revealed to be on nodding terms with ‘All Along the Watchtower’ and ‘It Ain’t Me, Babe’, it was like watching an old bar band warming up after a long break from the trenches. There were missed notes, dropped beats, rogue chords, halting rhythms. The band hovered around their master in a semi-circle, like nervous footballers awaiting a half-time bollocking. I looked at Dylan, looked into my notebook, and wrote ‘Brian Clough’.

It was precarious, but the music crackled. Dylan is still touring his most recent record, Rough and Rowdy Ways, and the sound is getting closer to conveying the intent in the album title.

When I saw him last, in Glasgow on Halloween 2022, there was an elegiac note to proceedings. He was 81 then and it felt like it might be his last rodeo. Well, he’s 83 now and in Edinburgh seemed rather more energised. The elegant poise of the 2022 show had been worked over. Jim Keltner on drums added heft and punch. The guitars were looser, crunchier. We might say that Dylan has ‘gone electric’ once again.

With the stately ‘I Contain Multitudes’, the set settled in. There was a surreal kind of theatre to it all. Dylan spent most of his time seated behind a grand piano, positioned not side-on to the audience, as is customary, but facing us. Sitting in the front and centre of the stalls, for the first two songs, all I could see was the top of his curly mop. When he played guitar he sat on his piano stool and turned his back to the audience, most likely in shame.

Dylan is a quite remarkably bad electric guitar player; I have rarely known anyone – certainly not anyone charging on the door – play with such careless conviction. Later, he leaned on the piano, so we could at least see him. From time to time, he shuffled out from behind it and sang into a hand-held mike, Vegas-style.

This was the night after the US election, but there was no comment made, either directly or obliquely, to events back home. Dylan liberated himself from that kind of thing a long time ago. There were no protest anthems and precious few classics. More than half the songs were from Rough and Rowdy Ways. He could happily drop two or three of them, but that’s all. The dusky drama of ‘Crossing the Rubicon’ and shimmering beauty of ‘Key West (Philosopher Pirate)’ were a match for anything he has done, revealing new ways of conjuring old magic.

We got ‘Desolation Row’, its ribbons of imagery unspooling incongruously over a fast tom-tom surf beat. ‘It’s All Over Now, Baby Blue’ was heavily deconstructed, not necessarily to its benefit, while a closing ‘Every Grain of Sand’ was played straight. It was deeply poignant, despite the fact that for its duration a large man with a grey mullet seemed poised to punch a guy sitting behind him. Five metres away, Dylan rolled on, apparently oblivious. I’m not sure he noticed any of us, actually. It felt as though he would have played exactly the same show to an empty room.

It was a fine performance but the usual caveats and disclaimers should be made. Anyone coming to Dylan cold, as it were, would surely have been baffled. His piano playing was wayward and often knocked the terrific band out of its stride. His singing was surprisingly good – for an 83-year-old Bob Dylan. Much of the time it was an unintelligible rasp placing the emphasis in weird places, but that’s not news to anyone.

By now, we will all be aware of our personal tolerance levels for his eccentricities. To a casual listener, the busker performing all the big songs outside the venue before and after the concert probably sounded much more like the real thing than the man inside, but I have a feeling that’s exactly the way Dylan likes it.

Almoços - Fontanelas

Em 06.12.2024, na Sociedade em Fontanelas, juntámo-nos uma vez mais: Zé Carlos (Bojardas), Tó Zé , Zé Eduardo Carvalhal, Paulo Santos (Barão), Pedro Teixeira e eu. Zé António Motta estava constipado e Tóto não apareceu.





domingo, 8 de dezembro de 2024

The spectator - Why children shouldn’t go vegan

 

(personal underlines)

Why children shouldn’t go vegan

It’s bad for developing brains

In an attempt to sell vegan diets to parents and children, Team GB, recently partnered with Birds Eye’s vegan food brand Green Cuisine. The programme will be delivered in primary schools across the UK. Now, the Guardian is reporting that hundreds of academics are urging British universities ‘to commit to 100 per cent plant-based catering’. Why? You guessed right: ‘to fight the climate crisis’. 

Research shows that veganism is intimately associated with nutritional deficiencies. A vegan diet negatively affects a developing brain, whether child or late adolescent. In Italy, after a number of babies raised on vegan diets required hospitalization for malnourishment, lawmakers made it a crime to feed children under 16 a vegan diet. Obviously inspired by developments in Italy, Belgian officials also made it illegal to force a vegan diet down a child’s throat.

Children raised on vegan diets suffer terribly. Worryingly, some reports suggest that as many as one in 12 British parents are now raising their children vegan. If you happen to be one of those parents, please stop. We are the descendants of avid meat-eaters. In the words of Dr. James O’Keefe when considering your health (and the health of your child), ‘you need to keep in mind the diet for which we’ve been adapted genetically’. ‘Animal-based foods have been an important part of the human diet for at least three million years. Eliminating all animal foods would be like deciding you’re going to feed a tiger tofu and expect that it’s going to be healthy.’ If you want your child to be healthy and happy, then, ‘you should feed it the diet for which it’s been genetically adapted via evolution down through the ages.’

In other words, don’t, under any circumstances, feed a young kid a vegan diet. After all, as studies show, veganism is intimately associated with osteoporosis and bone fractures. At school, children raised on vegan diets are less likely to thrive than meat-eating children. That’s because vegan diets often lack vitamin B12, which is found in meat, dairy and eggs. This vitamin plays an essential role in cognitive function and healthy brain development, as well as red blood cell formation and cell metabolism. Furthermore, vegan diets often lack other vital nutrients like protein, vitamin D, calcium, DHA, and iron. All are essential for a healthy body and healthy mind.

Veganism (and its close, slightly less problematic cousin, vegetarianism) is also strongly correlated with depression, which is affecting an increasing number of Brits, including a sizable chunk of teens and pre-teens. Meat-eaters tend to have lower levels of depression and lower levels of anxiety, another mental health problem plaguing British youth. To be clear, I am championing a diet rich in unprocessed meat: fresh chicken, turkey, beef, pork and fish; meat that hasn’t been modified. Burgers, chicken nuggets and other processed pretenders are to be avoided at all costs. They have no place in a healthy diet.

Finally, as researchers at the University of Alabama highlighted in 2020, disciples of plant-based diets are twice as likely to take prescribed drugs for various mental illnesses and three times more likely to engage in acts of self-harm than meat eaters. Omega 3 deficiencies appear to play a key role in fuelling these dark thoughts and behaviours.

But, some will say, a vegan diet is much better for the environment than a meat-based one. It’s not. Due to the overly aggressive agricultural practices involved, veganism contributes to soil pollution, air pollution, and water depletion. These are just some of the reasons why no child should ever be fed a vegan diet. And vegan propaganda has no place in British schools or universities.