Donations are essential to keep Write Out Loud going    

TEARING DOWN THE WALLS OF HEARTACHE

entry picture

What a bloody nonsense all this is.  This taking down of statues business.

Let me say from the outset that I deplore the killing of George Floyd and all the others who have died at the hands of police brutality.  I support the demonstrations in protest at this (peaceful and socially distanced, I add) although I do wonder what their aims are.  It seems to me that there are ample protections against racism de jure; it’s racism de facto which needs addressing ie attitudes.

But to return to the issue of book-burning ie statue toppling, I take the view that if a community or society agrees with removing a statue, it is perfectly reasonable to take it down and retain it in a museum somewhere.  It is a memento of our history.  It may not be a history you like, but it is history.

Unless you prefer Denial.

You may not like the fact that Britain has a colonial and imperial past, but it did. You may not like the fact that Britain engaged in slavery and the slave trade , but it did.  (You will also no doubt know that Britain was in the vanguard to abolish it in 1807). You may not like the fact that governments, communities, artists and writers celebrated its colonialist achievements. But they did.

So where will you stop your Denial?  Take down the monuments to Churchill for his role in the Boer War?  What if your great/grandfather fought there too? or in the Zulu Wars? Burn his photos from your family album?

Remove the name of James Penny from the street in Liverpool?  Ban “Penny Lane” by the Beatles?

Ban Madras curry and Bombay spiced potatoes from the menu of Indian restaurants?

And who else might we have offended?  The French?  Tear down Nelson’s Column and rename Waterloo Station.  The people of St Albans, Colchester and London?  Throw Boadicea and Her Daughters off Westminster Bridge. What about Karl Marx’s 10’ monument in Highgate Cemetery?  (No! Wait! He’s one of ours).

And don’t forget the Internationalist dimension to the movement.  We should be campaigning for the removal of statues of Chingis Khan, Julius Caesar, Hernan Cortes, Attila the Hun and all the rest of them who have blotted today’s politically correct copy book.

And finally I come to you yourself.  Have you not ever told a racist/sexist/ableist/ageist joke? Or laughed at one? Said or done something “–ist” in your many years?  Have you never watched and enjoyed “Gone With The Wind”? “Love Thy Neighbour”? “Come Fly With Me”? “Little Britain”?  No! Of course you haven’t.  You promptly turned your set off, didn’t you?

So what will your repentance constitute? A public apology printed in The Times? A personal apology to everyone you’ve ever slighted, both directly and indirectly?  A sizeable donation to a suitable charity? Self flagellation?

Be sure to let me know where your Denial stops.

◄ DRAW THE MUSIC

SUSPENDED SENTENCE ►

Comments

Profile image

John Coopey

Sat 13th Jun 2020 08:30

Contributors far cleverer than me, Greg, have argued in this forum that there are no rules in poetry. I merely take advantage of this licence! For my next piece I am experimenting with having Alfie the Dog bark my poem.

Profile image

Greg Freeman

Sat 13th Jun 2020 06:39

Sorry, John, I failed to spot the line-breaks in this one. Experimental? I agree with you though, that the behaviour of Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun - and indeed, Hitler - was not politically correct, what ever that loaded term means, or ever meant.

Profile image

John Coopey

Fri 12th Jun 2020 19:35

It is one of my many failings that I tend to do my research afterwards. I have now discovered the reference was to “Breaking Down The Walls of Heartache” and not “Tearing...” The original was done by Johnny Johnson and the Bandwagon.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I29K-gRUJM8

Profile image

John Coopey

Fri 12th Jun 2020 18:03

Many thanks, each.

Profile image

M.C. Newberry

Fri 12th Jun 2020 16:29

A comprehensive consideration of the dichotomy prevailing in attitudes today. It is difficult to resist joining a fashionable
passing parade that deploys righteous indignation as its cause.
Who doesn't enjoy participating in virtue in action? In truth, the
hardest thing is to retain a detached view of difficult contentious
circumstances until ALL the aspects have been examined in detail
"in the cold light of day"..Unfortunately, by that time judgements
have been arrived at, not by the above but by hearsay, assumptions, agendas - and prejudice itself, inflamed by politicial demagoguery and media demonisation.
We hear much of the term "police brutality". It is such a
familiar mantra, slipping off the tongue so easily yet hardly comprehensive when it fails to address the complete scenario that
led to the need, let alone the extent of its employment. This sort
of emotive issue is essentially for the determination of the courts.
Let the witnesses be called and their testimony tested! Then let
us be satisfied that the law has taken its proper course.

If you wish to post a comment you must login.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

Find out more Hide this message