Skip to main content

9/11 - 18 YEARS LATER

much has changed...
18 YEARS AGO, like most everyone else, I watched the planes hit the twin towers on this day, on television, and was stunned. I felt instantly this was a different level of historic event I was witnessing - the world had changed. That gets said a lot, but 9/11 was a major shift - the start of the 21st century that has led, one way or another, to where we are today.

IRONICALLY, the rise of the digital social media world, and the collapse of the banking system a decade ago, could not be foreseen then, nor Trump, Brexit, or the resurgence of Russia and China, and the relative decline of America, in the world. Nor that a Black President would be twice elected in a once slavery-owning nation.

IN SOME WAYS, 9/11 feels like a much-more-distant event, now - like Pearl Harbour, or the Charge of the Light Brigade - because the 2003 illegal war in Iraq, and then the tragic destruction in Syria, as well as the enduring Palestinian-Israeli conflict, not to mention the rise of ever-more extreme radical violent groups in the middle east, and populism across the world, have almost erased the impact.

BUT I RECALL PM Tony Blair speaking that day, pledging alliance to the USA - and for better and worse - that led to 2003's invasion; and it led to the election of Obama, eventually, because of the sort of man Bush was, and surrounded himself with. He was a flawed man, Blair, yet he was, at least, a friend to the idea of a West - of alliances, of the EU, of NATO, of the UN - regardless of how poorly he served those ideals.

THE DISRUPTION we have seen since 2016 is of another magnitude again. Because in 2001, the enemy was very much thought to be outside the walls - now, the enemy is literally elected, by us, or, claims we are the enemy. Our own leaders, in the West, conspire to bring down so much else besides towers. The lurch to disintegration, chaos, may be a mere lust for power, in the rational idea that when things are up for grabs in the mayhem, they can be got dirt cheap. A lesson was learned in the 20th century, when the Soviet Union collapsed... massive fortunes were gained.

BREXIT and the collapse of the UK, the EU - NATO perhaps - perhaps soon the UN - all these goals of deconstruction - feed into the purposes of men (and they are mostly men) like Trump, like Boris, like Farage.

18 YEARS LATER, the fires of the Amazon transfix us on TV; but the terror comes from elections and elected officials - and what war will be waged to save the climate, let alone democracy, now? 2019 is arguably one of the darkest years since 1939, for Britain, for the world. I hope for the best, and prepare for a lesser outcome.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CLIVE WILMER'S THOM GUNN SELECTED POEMS IS A MUST-READ

THAT HANDSOME MAN  A PERSONAL BRIEF REVIEW BY TODD SWIFT I could lie and claim Larkin, Yeats , or Dylan Thomas most excited me as a young poet, or even Pound or FT Prince - but the truth be told, it was Thom Gunn I first and most loved when I was young. Precisely, I fell in love with his first two collections, written under a formalist, Elizabethan ( Fulke Greville mainly), Yvor Winters triad of influences - uniquely fused with an interest in homerotica, pop culture ( Brando, Elvis , motorcycles). His best poem 'On The Move' is oddly presented here without the quote that began it usually - Man, you gotta go - which I loved. Gunn was - and remains - so thrilling, to me at least, because so odd. His elegance, poise, and intelligence is all about display, about surface - but the surface of a panther, who ripples with strength beneath the skin. With Gunn, you dressed to have sex. Or so I thought.  Because I was queer (I maintain the right to lay claim to that

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".