Skip to main content

OVER 1,372 CASES

A week ago, last Sunday, I wrote the following prediction of a worst case for the UK:

 'Viruses peak, so we may expect a rapid acceleration of cases - maybe 1000 by Mothering Sunday in a fortnight in Britain; and 34 deaths. Any higher number so soon would be worse case bad.'

 A fortnight is two weeks, but here we are, 7 days later, with 1,372 cases and 35 deaths. If we have 5,000 cases in a week, and 500 deaths, we will know we are on a very bad path, and closer to the 'Italy scenario' than thought.

 It is obvious there is a scientific debate of unusual urgency and impact unfolding, here in Britain, as the PM's chief scientific advisors opt for less agressive containment measures than their counterparts on the continent have gone for - Germany, Italy, Denmark, and France, are in various stages of lockdown - the thought of all cafes and restaurants in France closed is strikingly poignant - not even the Nazi invasion managed that.

 This is now humanity's World War 3 - a once only sci-fi vision of nations at a standstill, as thousands die daily, and economies crumble, facing an obligate parasite with only one design - to infect hosts and replicate.

 This blog believes that stronger Wuhan-style containment would be advised at this point - self-appointed social distancing is never as persuasive (or fair for businesses looking for insurance support) as emergency law. The more draconian the better.

 Behavioural psychologists worried there is not enough carrot and too much stick in isolation need to recognise the fear factor will surely rise very soon... Spain saw 200 deaths in 24 hours - the sort of death rate news a nation usually only receives in wartime. For example, the usual death rate for Viet Nam, for American soldiers, was 100 casualties or less most days. 

 One thing is sure - this is only the beginning. Be safe, and wash your hands often.


Labels:

Comments

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