THE QUEEN SHOULD HAVE THE VACCINE FIRST

In today's news, in a bizarre attempt to suddenly appear like a republican meritocracy, the government seems to have announced that the 'Queen and PM would wait in line like everyone else' for the Vaccine that may be coming soon to SAVE US ALL.

This is absurd. Since when does the Queen have to do anything like 'everyone else'? If she falls ill, or requires medicine, it is promptly and effectively delivered and administered by the best experts in the land. Her 'knights' stand by to do her bidding. We literally pray and sing songs wishing her a long life. As the ruler of the land, it would be both churlish and overly-democratic to try and erect a sudden and false barrier to the Queen accessing top-level medical supplies.

Nor is such a gesture even remotely necessary. If and when the Vaccine is approved, it will be rolled out with a million doses available per week. The first tranche is due to go to NHS workers, and those over the age of 80. The Queen's placebo effect makes her the best medicine the NHS has - if she God forbid fell ill now, it would demoralise the nation and be awful and tragic. Further, she is over 80. So, she falls into a top tier for treatment.

Nor would anyone else suffer unwanted hardship if Her Majesty took one of the first million jabs.

In fact, just the opposite.

As tested as this wonder drug is likely to be, vaccines usually take ten years, not ten months, to create and test. Even the safest medicine does have, from time to time, unwanted side effects. Some people die horribly from one aspirin. Most don't, which is the basis on which modern medicine is based - the law of averages. Cruel in the individual case, but normally kinder across the species population.

Therefore, anyone AVOIDING taking the new Covid-19 vaccine first is actually far less brave and less helpful, than those willing to risk much, and sacrifice everything, to advance scientific knowledge and the general health of the nation.

It would seem that having the Queen roll up a sleeve and take the vaccine, in public, for example, would do much to boost (no pun intended) our willingness to try it, and line up, once our age level is called.

IF the government wants to pretend it is noble to avoid the vaccine, they may wish to rethink their PR strategy.

Maybe the first shots could be given at Barnard Castle?

Comments

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...".

E Y E W E A R, THE BLOG - FREEDOM MEANS BEING UNAFRAID TO WRITE WHAT YOU THINK

Search This Blog