Skip to main content

Threatening Cultural Sites


It will not surprise readers of this blog to learn that we are not major benefactors of Trump's campaign for re-election, or that we hardly favour his usual tactics or rhetoric.

Even by his own standards, however, the threats of the past few hours have marked an escalation into territory more usually occupied by the Taliban, or other notable war criminals.

 The threat to destroy 'cultural' targets of value to the Iranian people and their civilisation, aside from anything else, is repulsive. Its barbarism is, frankly, against the grain of any optimistic hopes left to the human race in the few decades left to us. Should such destruction be visited upon museums, ancient or sacred places, monuments, or other national treasures, the whole world will be impoverished, both morally and culturally.

 Trump's behaviour of the past few days - beyond Nixonian - is beginning to confirm the worst fears many had upon his election - that if threatened he would stoop to Nero-level acts.

 Trump is not yet, by any margin, in the history books as one of the most insane, cruel or evil leaders of our sorry past - but he is on the verge of leaping into the annals of infamy, and committing acts of such awful wickedness as to shame any in the West still beholden to his faction.

 It is time for sane, just and reasonable Americans to rise and restrict this menace, in the name of what is best in us.
Labels:

Comments

Sylvie Marie said…
So good that you keep this blog going on; We met a decade ago in Maastricht and now in 2020, I am going to the festival in Medellin and your blog is linked to the presentation page of the festival because of the poem of me that you shared. Thanks for this, Todd!
Sun Jan 05, 07:39:00 pm 2020
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A  poem for my mother, July 15 When she was dying And I was in a different country I dreamt I was there with her Flying over the ocean very quickly, And arriving in the room like a dream And I was a dream, but the meaning was more Than a dream has – it was a moving over time And land, over water, to get love across Fast enough, to be there, before she died, To lean over the small, huddled figure, In the dark, and without bothering her Even with apologies, and be a kiss in the air, A dream of a kiss, or even less, the thought of one, And when I woke, none of this had happened, She was still far distant, and we had not spoken.
Post a Comment
Read more

Poetry vs. Literature

Poetry is, of course, a part of literature. But, increasingly, over the 20th century, it has become marginalised - and, famously, has less of an audience than "before". I think that, when one considers the sort of criticism levelled against Seamus Heaney and "mainstream poetry", by poet-critics like Jeffrey Side , one ought to see the wider context for poetry in the "Anglo-Saxon" world. This phrase was used by one of the UK's leading literary cultural figures, in a private conversation recently, when they spoke eloquently about the supremacy of "Anglo-Saxon novels" and their impressive command of narrative. My heart sank as I listened, for what became clear to me, in a flash, is that nothing has changed since Victorian England (for some in the literary establishment). Britain (now allied to America) and the English language with its marvellous fiction machine, still rule the waves. I personally find this an uncomfortable position - but when ...
15 comments
Read more

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....
3 comments
Read more