Palin Shatnerized

(Yes, that's a zee because they are both American.)



Hat tip to the ever-resourceful AKMuckraker.

Norwich North

I don't know what to make of this. Craig Murray claims he's being gagged. He's standing in the Norwich North by-election, due in two weeks' time. There are eleven other candidates, with the Tories favourite to win. Last I heard, Ladbrokes were quoting him at 25/1, ahead of the Lib Dems (33/1) and the BNP (200/1), UKIP and sundry others.

He's had grief (which he blames on the Ministry of Justice) from the Post Office over getting his electoral address out; the BBC is refusing to give him any coverage; "and, despite numerous representations from within their own union, the Universities and Colleges Union have still banned me from this evenings candidates' education debate, despite the fact that I am the Rector of a Univeristy and a great deal more interesting on the subject than the rest of the candidates put together."

Craig Murray, one of the Indy's Alternative National Treasures*, is the ex-ambassador to Uzbekistan, the man who blew the whistle on the UK's complicity in obtaining "evidence" through torture. In this respect he is on the side of the angels. He was hounded out of office for his pains. All sorts of mud was chucked at him, and then he was ignored, except by the (occasionally rather strange) people that haunt his comments box. By his own admission he's clearly not the most compliant of employees, and his behaviour in - ah - certain matters has been less than saintly. That sets him apart from other pols then, eh?

He is standing on an anti-sleaze platform.** Whatever mud's actually stuck to him from the past, none of it's sleaze-coloured.

Minority candidates usually get a bum deal from the media, unless they are deemed to be newsworthy in their own right. Think how the media have salivated over BNP - and I wonder how many votes BNP would get if they didn't. I'd have thought Murray's colourful past and ability to insert himself in the governmental nasal orifice would make good copy, but the BBC doesn't see it that way:

[in]response to the many complaints about their decision to exclude me from all election coverage. They have started to send out standard replies saying:
one of the key factors they look for is "evidence of past and/or current electoral support" in that electoral area.
Note the BBC's own quotation marks within that quote. They have tacked on "In that area" to their formal criterion.

When the BBC banned me from all coverage at the last General Election when I stood in Blackburn against Jack Straw, who is blocking my electoral address now, the BBC explained it was because I had no "evidence of past and/or current electoral support".

I gained 5% in that election - which is a lot better than the 3% the Greens got in the same election in Norwich North. That 5% may have been modest, but it does meet the BBC's criterion. So the BBC have now moved the goalposts to exclude me, by adding a brand new stipulation "in that area" to their criterion, so the electoral support in Blackburn does not count - despite the fact I might reasonably expect to do a lot better in my own county.

As for the bureaucracy, the whole system is geared up to deal with major parties. So the apparent gagging of Dr Murray isn't necessarily evidence of bad faith conspiring to put the kibosh on his campaign, more likely a convergence of inertia, incuriosity and incompetence. Nevertheless, it is all a bit odd.

I don't know if I'd be voting for him myself if I were in Norwich North. You have to question the common sense of someone who imagines that voters will bother to look at an election address on DVD. But whatever your political stripe, if his allegations here have any real substance it's a cause for concern. The three major parties have an entrenched right to airtime whatever their chances of success, while BNP is becoming a creature of the media, interviewed and analysed wherever they go.


*The Independent says:

Craig Murray Former ambassador

Britain is a better place now that Craig Murray has returned. As ambassador to Uzbekistan, Murray witnessed the UK's changing attitude to torture, and rather than keep it under his hat, came back and revealed all. He had his own problems, what with the drinking and leaving his wife for a dancer. But after a breakdown, he has bounced back to become a fully fledged member of the awkward squad. The Foreign Office may have disowned him, but we welcome him with open arms.

**The Put an Honest Man in Parliament party isn't quite as sexist as it sounds. He had to form it urgently as it was the only way he could get the slogan on the ballot paper.

Brutish National Party

I hate them with a deep and abiding passion.
I hate that they arrogate to themselves the word "British", which refers to a politically troubled archipelago off Northwestern Europe.
I hate that they arrogate to themselves the word "national" and purport to define it. [...]

I wish I knew what to do. When there are enough sad gits to vote in a BNP MEP, it feels as if liberal democracy has failed. Or rather, that it has finally delivered the inevitable outcome of tolerance.

More anon. Meanwhile, let's just remind ourselves of the sort of people they are. Ordinary, ignorant.

[Edited to make me seem a nicer person than I am.]

Update
Andrew Brons, the new MEP for Yorkshire and Humberside, is a former Chairman of the National Front. He has a conviction for using insulting words and behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace (directed at a black police officer). He was ambivalent about the value of firebombing synagogues, which might do the cause more harm than good. He led the chant: if they're black, send them back. And so on. None of this is a great secret.

In a facebook discussion last night I was foolish enough to refer to him as "a sh**" and to complain of the "ignorance, prejudice, hostility, self-righteousness of the BNP voters". I got flamed for my "mass generalisations and angry tone." Apparently some of them are "little old ladies" who are terrified by smooth-talking canvassers into believing that they will be murdered in their beds by illegal immigrants, and we should be reaching out and educating the poor dears.

Quite how a "little old lady" (and isn't that term demeaning!) could live so long and remain so ignorant escapes me. Surely it's simple racism of the sort that so often runs like a sewer under a veneer of decency? There was a time when racism was open and unashamed of itself, busy controlling jobs and tenancies, promotions and awards, and generally inscribing itself on the culture. And some people seem to regret its passing.

I refuse to make excuses for BNP voters. They may be disaffected, they may have much to feel disaffected about, but there are plenty of other parties to vote for who aren't racist. All the BNP offers that other parties don't is a particularly noxious line on race. And possibly - and possibly we aren't paying enough attention to this - the BNP knocks on doors and talks to people. Few mainstream parties have had the courage to do that this time, now the whole of British politics is being played out as a TV reality show. The voter wants to feel important too. The voter wants someone to care what he thinks. It doesn't seem to matter to some voters who that someone is.

OxPo redux

Admittedly I was angry when I wrote that last somewhat incoherent post. I've calmed down a bit now.

There are several issues here, which need untangling.

1. The archaic post of Professor of Poetry. The job needs reform.

The duties of the Professor are to give one public lecture each term; to give the Creweian Oration at Encaenia every other year (since 1972 in English); each year to be one of the judges for the Newdigate Prize, the Lord Alfred Douglas Prize and the Chancellor's English Essay Prize; every third year to help judge the prize for the English poem on a sacred subject, and generally to encourage the art of poetry in the University.

For this s/he will receive a stipend of £6,901 pa (pay award pending) and a princely £40 per Creweian Oration. A mercy they don't still have to give it in Latin.

2. The method of election. This needs reform too. While the overwhelming number of beneficiaries of the lectures are undergraduates, they have no vote. The candidate is chosen by secret ballot of senior members of the University. Not just the dons, but any old geezer, who may have no interest in poetry whatsoever, who sports an MA (Oxon). (Not suggesting that votes can be bought, of course.) There are no postal votes or electronic votes. Voting is in person, and the wearing of gowns optional. Well, of course you can't let young people choose their own professor; they are too young to know anything, let alone what's good for them. It has always been this way, and therefore it must continue. It is a tradition, and that's the sort of thing England, and above all Oxford, does exceedingly well.

3. The candidates. One would think that a poetry professor whose job consists light duties consist mainly of giving lectures on poetry should be chosen on the basis of their skills in lecturing on poetry. They don't have to be poets; indeed, the present Professor, Christopher Ricks, is not known for his poetry but was elected because he is an inspiring critic.

4. The campaign. One would think that candidates would campaign on their ability to deliver the lectures, and if they have any, their skill as poets. As far as I can tell, they have. No-one but an idiot would engage in negative campaigning, let alone by anonymous proxy. I'm frankly amazed that anyone could have such a low opinion of any of the candidates that they should think differently.

5. Sexual harassment. Look, I loathe sexual harassment. It has no place in the university. It's not flattering. It's not a joke. It is corrupting and demeaning, and sometimes frightening. A tutor who offers or withholds good grades on the basis of the giving or withholding of sexual favours is no better than one who would do the same for money. In fact, probably worse.

There were two anti-Walcott campaigns. One was started by a woman using her own name (there's a bit of a muddle even there) asking a group of her contacts whether someone with a reputation for harassment should be appointed to the post. This email was forwarded on, as can be the way of emails, and became a campaign. It would be a legitimate question where the appointee is to come into personal contact with students. But this job doesn't. Perhaps they were afraid that it might involve such contact under the rubric "and generally to encourage the art of poetry in the University." In that case, perhaps it can be excused as legitimate debate. Or it could be, if there were evidence that any of this were true, apart from the allegations by the alleged victims themselves. At any rate, were the appointee to be in a position to sexually harass students here, then the allegations should have been put to him properly, and he should have been required to answer them before his candidacy could proceed. He shouldn't be tried in the court of public opinion. (We are pig sick of that forum.)

There was a second, and utterly disgraceful, campaign conducted anonymously in which pages from a book accusing Walcott of harassment were mailed to prominent female academics. That is smear. There is no excuse for the anonymity and it's not possible to debate with or counter anonymous allegations.

5. The suggestion that appointing someone with sexual harassment allegations hanging over him would bring the Professorship, and Oxford itself, into disrepute. Has it brought the Nobel laureateship into disrepute? Well, has it?

6. If you are against X you must be in favour of Y. Wrong. Walcott's supporters ask themselves cui bono? and conclude that Padel's supporters must be behind the smears. While one of her supporters hasn't been above repeating them publicly, it doesn't follow that this is the reason for either of the campaigns. It is quite possible that feminist anti-harasser animus is sufficient motive. My god, haven't these people ever met an angry feminist?


The election is on Saturday. It had promised to be exciting: poetry giant vs poetry populist vs poetry heavyweight largely unknown in Oxford. There were real issues involved. As it is, the whole business feels sullied. I feel sullied. I don't want to go and vote. I want to protest at the world for being different from how I'd like it to be.

OxPo Foes

Sickening. Vandals.

I am disappointed that such low tactics have been used in this election and I do not want to get into a race for a post where it causes embarrassment to those who have chosen to support me for the role, or to myself.

I already have a great many work commitments and, while I was happy to be put forward for the post, if it has degenerated into a low and degrading attempt at character assassination, I do not want to be part of it.

Derek Walcott has withdrawn from the race for Oxford Professor of Poetry - not for any poetic reasons, but because certain idiots have sent over 100 anonymous letters to voters repeating personal allegations at least 20 years old. (It's only from the Oxford Mail that I learn the recipients were all female.) Who could have sent them, and why? And why anonymous? Are they seeking to smear Walcott, or is it some Machiavellian swipe against Padel? There was nothing particularly secret about these allegations: as someone who is hardly at the centre of poetry gossip I first heard of them years ago. They were published and ignored. Even if they were true, they have nothing to do with his ability to deliver the lectures. They didn't stop him getting tenure at Boston.

Ah, but.

I don't really understand why he didn't face them down as he's always done in the past. He might have been elected; he might not. Either way, he would have come out of it looking as if he didn't give a stuff about the person who made the allegations. Whoever is elected now won't have the satisfaction of knowing they won in a fair fight.

Hermione Lee has called on Padel to dissociate herself from it, which she has done. She has just been on PM saying it's absolutely terrible. She deplores that it's been all over the press this way. She feels tainted. She has no idea who sent the letters or why. She's wondered whether to withdraw, but supporters have persuaded her she shouldn't be deflected.

Other dons are claiming that there would certainly have been other candidates if Walcott hadn't been standing. That's true, and the animosity against Padel is palpable and suggests that even if elected she would have to endure continual sniping from some quarters. Perhaps she should withdraw after all, leaving Mehrotra as a shoo-in.

The best solution would be to postpone the election, but that's been ruled out. Why in the name of all that's rational can't someone rush through an amending statute? This election should be about poetry. If art were judged only on the moral virtue of artists, there wouldn't be a lot left. And it's hardly as if the Professor of Poetry does one-to-one tutes, or exercises any power over grades.

Oxford has been deprived of a fair choice of candidates. It's a moot point whether the smear campaign did this, or whether it was Walcott himself in choosing to stand down. It is a huge shame he's removed himself from the race.

I bet John Walsh is feeling pretty sick too. (I wish I'd never mentioned his wretched article.) A snarky leader in today's Independent (the paper Walsh writes for) is almost actionable in its innuendo.

I don't really know Padel, I've never even had a drink with her - but I cannot for one moment credit that she would have had anything to do with this crapfest. I'd guess she was pretty embarrassed even by the Indy's totally un-anonymous Walshing. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

We are all tainted. We are humans, appetitive and fallible. Without those qualities, no-one could write poetry. And we are all the poorer for this sort of non-poetic battle about poetry jobs.

The row on Harriet continues here.

Not a day longer

from 10 Downing Street
to e-petition signatories

date 3 April 2009 15:44
subject Government response to petition 'notadaylonger'
mailed-bypetitions.pm.gov.uk

hide details 3 Apr (2 days ago) Reply

You signed a petition asking the Prime Minister to "Stop seeking to further extend pre-charge detention."

The Prime Minister's Office has responded to that petition and you can view it here:

http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page18895

Prime Minister's Office

Petition information - http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/notadaylonger/


Bastards.

Il Divo

Quite a contrast with last week's movie, this stylish piece from Sorrentino foregrounds cinematographic technique with clever background music to make a drama which never pretends to the documentary. It deals with the top end of society, its manners, masks and gross corruptions. The children in Entre les Murs are saints by comparison. Knowing little of Italian politics - though I remember the perennial Andreotti, the whiff of corruption that hung about him, the tragedies of Aldo Moro and Falcone, and the endlessly interrogated mystery of Calvi (and how can any of these be called "politics"? Oh, and I recall learning back in school that Italy's system of proportional representation led to inherently unstable government and unpalatable dealmaking) - even knowing so little, I found it compelling. A huge amount must have been over my head. I don't know enough to know what percentage that might be but guess it's well north of 50: I don't speak Italian; I know precious little about their political structures; I don't know the names of the politicians, nor remember them from one scene to the next so was frequently lost. But I'd gladly go again, and not just to pick up a few of the threads I missed first time round. For the most part, it's fascinating viewing. The very few longueurs are places where too much explanation is being given, and are defined only by the drive of the rest of the film.

Jumpcuts, flashbacks, flashforwards and leitmotifs create depth and texture. The fizzing glass of migraine cure marks the end of an Act. The focus on his curious hands has its own strange language once his secretary explains it to his inexplicable visitor.

Let's take her as an example of the ambiguity the film revels in. A woman appears at his office, sur commande. She is attractive, very nervous - frightened even. Her blouse is undone by one too many buttons for her to be respectable. Yet she has crows' feet - she must be fortyfive if she's a day, far too old to be a prostitute. What other explanation can there be? She seeks advice from the loyal secretary as if an ingénue from a madam. When she meets Andreotti she is shy, but embraces him. They talk of intimacy, she says she explores herself... The camera focuses on his hair, his physicality. The next time we see her she is on the arm of an Ambassador, and when someone asks her about her painting dismisses it: "I just dabble." Can we believe that Andreotti, whose power could command whomsoever he could choose, would choose a woman d'un certain age to be his companion of the night, or a "dabbler" to paint his portait?

This is a drama, so we can take it only as a means to the construction of a character - one who is undemonstrative, enigmatic.

And yes, so much comes down to the physical presence. Much as there's a hint of The West Wing in that encounter on the diplomat's arm at the ball, even though it's taking the trope of embarrassed recognition to put a different spin on it, so there is an inescapable comparison with Richard III. At least for the English. Er, well, there's the intelligence, the dead bodies strewn on the path to power. And the hunchback. I am ashamed to mention it. Yet it's undeniably there. If we're going to be politically incorrect here, let's go the whole hog and suggest that the Italians, in common with their French neighbours, are much less bothered by political correctness than the Anglo-Saxons.

But like Entre les Murs, it is an intelligent film, treats its audience like adults. And engaged. Whereas Entre les Murs listens to children for once, and shows teachers to be fallible - and neither of them perfect - this film ironises Andreotti's claims to innocence. He is never seen to mandate anything. Enemies die right and left; he prays. The only hint of guilt is circumstantial: the kiss. Later, he jokes that a politician must take care whom he associates with: think of Jesus and Judas. Later still, there is a parody of Leonardo's Last Supper where associates meet to anoint him presidential candidate. No-one kisses and betrays him. They all toast him with wine, white and red, even the cardinal, while he toasts with migraine remedy, his cup of bitterness and guilt.

And his physicality is amazing. Toni Servillo as Andreotti manages to make his neck disappear. He wears a hunchback. His curious hands have a role of their own: praying, or marking pleasure or displeasure. He holds his body still as if nothing could move him. His stillness exemplifies his power - and occasionally his vulnerability.

It's overdone in places, no question. The ears are too much. The abject senator whose name I forget (the ugly, stupid one who complains that A never showed him any affection) is a caricature. No-one would vote for him. The kingmaker whose name I forget wouldn't have tested the slide of the marble floor IRL even if he fancied himself as a funky dancer. The scene after Andreotti is indicted, where he is sitting with his wife who is channel-hopping to avoid the appalling news - very stagey, but effective. After many channel-hops she finds a station playing a torch song and as the two of them sit there and she reaches out a hand to him and tears up, you can't be sure whether she is weeping for her husband, or the man she thought he was.

Along with the swooping and savvy camera work, an extraordinarily eclectic range of incidental music, sometimes so brief it was over before I noticed it.

The credits played to this:


Update
Why I walked out of my own biopic: an interview with Andreotti about the film here.

Morph

Why Bolero of all things?

Using lists

Perusing the list of BNP members induced a mixture of emotions. Schadenfreude, because I detest them and all they stand for, and it was an odd sort of poetic justice to see them exposed like that. Ridicule that they'd let it happen. Shame, because however awful they are, ordinary members deserve their privacy. Anxiety that I might find someone I know there, or someone from my own village. Revulsion at the large numbers of people from the same family, again and again, with teenagers signed up to the youth group. A grudging respect for all the volunteering that it represented: every one of those thousands of entries had been compiled by someone knocking on a door, filling in a form, and someone else collating it.

I wasn't looking at the original file, but one that someone else had copied and posted up, so there was minimal formatting, no tablulation. But it was clear that there were fields for title, first name, surname, qualifications, address, and comments. These last were pathetically illuminating:

Accountancy skills
Activist (discretion requested)
Activist. Ex-Independent candidate (General Election May 05). Good networker
Activist. Former Lib Dem agent. Change of address 21/3/07
Activist. Letter sent re. temporary activity ban (Southampton area) of six months
Activist. Previously listed as Alfred
Activist. Upgrade from Standard to Gold m/ship 3/4/07
Aged 17 (06). Change of address 18/6/07
Body piercer/retailer (self-employed). BA (Hons) Business Enterprise. City & Guilds Adult Teaching Cert. Diplomas in Aromatherapy/Reflexology. Former nurse. Hobbies: dancing, swimming, walking, caravanning
Borough councillor.
Bounced cheque: membership cancelled 4/11/05.
Business owner
Candidate
Candidate willing
Candidate willing Has meeting venue available
Carpenter/builder
Cert Ed. (Law/Accounting). Hobbies: researcher/writer modern philosophy & pre-historic mysteries. Poetry. Yoga, martial arts, body-building (former competitor). Occasional martial arts/fitness instructor
Chartered town planner
Civil servant
Commercial artist.
Company director
Composer/musician/lecurer. Doctor of Philosophy (Composition) PhD. Cert. ED:FE, BA (Hons), BTEC computer software. Soundtrack writer, ethnomusicologist. Hobbies: music (performance), rambling/hiking, ornithology, history, poetry
Computer skills (web design)
Computer skills (web design)
Director (small company). ANZIQS, NZATC, NZCQS, NZCB. Hobbies: lay-reading (C of E)
Director a tatoo [sic] & body piercing studio. Qualified mountaineering instructor (AMI). Hobbies: DIY
Donation £35 (07). Original birth cert returned 29/3/07
Donation £5 (07)
Engineer. City & Guilds (motor engineering).
Ex-serviceman (Army). Hobbies DIY, dogs
Experience of legal, constitutional & european law. Publishing skills
Ex-serviceman (MoD Police). Abex
Ex-serviceman. Hobbies: woodwork/metalwork. Proof-reader
Ex-serviceman. Retired docker
Ex-serviceman. Retired lecturer. Abex
Factory manager
Family: (name). Comps slip: gold/family membership
Film maker (amateur) with own recording studio
Fluent French/Dutch
Fluent German
Former Conservative councillor (13 years).
Former police/prison officer
Former policeman (international security/counter terrorism)
Gold badge not received - replacement sent 12/2/07
Graphic design/desktop publishing
Housewife. Hobbies: walking, water colour painting
Illustrator/graphic designer (professional)
IT experience
Jobbing builder, cabinet maker, boat builder, restorer. Hobbies: boating, fishing
Joiner (placards/boards etc.). Security
Joiner. Slater. Tiler (self-employed). Hobbies: fishing, darts, pool
Law graduate. Teacher (English literature)
Locksmith/carpenter
Manager (building site). City & Guilds (plastering, floor laying). Hobbies: karate (2nd Dan instructor), clay pidgeon[sic] shooting. Lead singer/drummer with band
Manager (senior)
Manufacturing company owner
Marketing skills
Mechanic/manufacturing engineer (self-employed)
Military/social historian
Mobile DJ with singing partner, snakes & spiders
Musician (professional)
Nick's double
Office manager
Parish councillor
Party chairman
Pilot (helicopter/aeroplane)
Plumber/gas engineer
Printing company owner
Refrigeration and air conditioning engineer
Resigned 02/06/04. Will not be renewing 07 (unhappy with his reception within the Party - reports not published, etc.) Journalist
Retired clerical worker/fireman on British Railways. Hobbies: railways
Retired fitter
Retired Head of Mathematics
Retired male nurse
Retired martial arts instructor. Plasterer
Retired primary teacher. Cert. Ed/Teaching. Hobbies: knitting, walking
Retired R & D engineer. Former chief engineer &; consultant (engineering/environmental). BSc Mechanical Engineering. Hobbies: archaeology, English history/literature
Sales/marketing
Security officer
Self-employed
Senior citizen: paid full rate
Serviceman
Serviceman (Army)
Singer/musician (English Folk)
Site manager (construction)
Teacher (secondary school) (discretion requested)
Teacher. Cert. Ed. Hobbies: astronomy, wildlife, ancient history, handwriting
Video editing equipment
Will not be renewing 07 (took offence to newspaper reports about the Party)
Will not be renewing. Now supporting UKIP
Will not be renewing 07 (court case pending)
Will not be renewing 07 (emigrating)

By contrast, I learn from Huffington Post that Obama's team emailed everyone on their campaign list on Monday:

The campaign was letting me know that barackobama.com was directing visitors to volunteer for -- or donate to -- relief efforts to aid the victims of the Southern California fires.

Huffington adds:

There are, of course, some on the political fringes already mounting their pushback, as Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia did, comparing Obama's call for national service to "what Hitler did in Nazi Germany" and "what the Soviet Union did." Jonah Goldberg likened it to "slavery" (of course, Goldberg's latest advice on dealing with the financial meltdown is for Obama to do nothing).

Perhaps one good thing that will come out of the hard times will be a collective willingness to ignore such bleating -- and to do what so clearly needs to be done to ameliorate the human suffering those hard times have brought.

A crisis is a terrible thing to waste.

Identity politics

A great post by Reginald Shepherd on identity politics.

[snip] The impulse to explain poetry as a symptom of its author's biography or its social context is pervasive these days, including among authors themselves. But that has always seemed to me a form of self-imprisonment, neglecting or even negating the possibilities poetry offers not just of being someone else, anyone and/or everyone else, but of being no one at all, of existing, however contingently, outside the shackles of identity and definition. Poetry is, among other things, a way of opening up worlds and possibilities of worlds. It offers a combination of otherness and brotherhood, the opportunity to find the otherness in the familiar, to find the familiar in the other. [/snip]

I agree that identity politics can be boring. That's when it's unambitious for language, and focused on grievance. (And I'm not denying that grievance can be well justified.) But don't you think that people can be included, rather than excluded, by work rooted in identity? Isn't it possible for me, a white hetero woman, to be more than simply a cultural tourist when reading Aime Cesaire, or John Agard, or Lemn Sissay? Or Marilyn Hacker, or Mark Doty, or Thom Gunn? Isn't it possible that the sheer explicitness of the identity can sometimes touch us at a more human level than simple groupthink? I'd be wary of a poetry that insisted one had to cut free of where the poet comes from, in order to achieve some sort of universal poetic sensibility. (And I'd be wary, not least, because of norms that may be taken for granted.) When the reader can trust the voice, through the use of language, s/he can imagine better what it's like to be (say) a Catholic farm boy in Protestant-dominated Northern Ireland, and look at where he's pointing. And the humanity that's touched there is somehow all the deeper for starting in difference.