Power, politics and PR

click photo to enlarge
A long time ago I heard Tony Benn, a Labour MP, remark that in politics it should be policies, not personalities, that are important. As the UK's general election campaign has followed its course over the past few weeks that thought has resounded in my head more than once.

The US-style TV "debates" featuring the leaders of the three largest parties have, in my view, been an unmitigated disaster for British politics. They have trivialised it in an entirely predictable way. The news media's headlines after each of the three events were all the same,"Who won last night's debate?" Why any rational, intelligent person should think that a matter of any importance is beyond me. The qualities necessary to make a presentation and to answer questions on TV are not those required by people whose job it is to formulate and implement policies that will take a country forward. There are those who believe that the character of the person leading a country is important. It is, but we are never going to know very much at all about the true character of our leaders. On TV and elsewhere we will only see that which the PR people, "handlers", managers and others show us (gaffes excepted). One would think that the example of Winston Churchill would resonate for the British. He has been variously described by biographers and historians as a drunkard, a mysoginist, a racist and much more. He was excellent with a prepared speech, but would have found a TV debate much more difficult. Yet, for all his failings, he clearly had the personal and political qualities necessary to steer the country in its darkest hour.

It seems to me that too many of the voting and non-voting public come to their decisions on the basis of flim-flam - "it's time for a change", "I don't like what this government has done for the last 5 years", " I like the sound of him". How many, one wonders, have read the election manifestos of the contending parties? How many have compared the policy proposals? How many realise that the best we can ever do is cast our vote for the least worst option! Perhaps my condemnation of these debates is excessive. As I write this piece most of the votes have been counted, and the party of the person widely judged to have done best on TV hasn't improved its standing. Maybe the British public treated them like "The X Factor" except that they didn't flock to the stores and buy the records!

What has any of this to do with my photograph of a London office block? The answer is "power." Looking at the image it reminded me of the cinematic cliche whereby a director wishing to emphasise the powerful, aloof nature of characters in business or politics, has the camera swing upwards to a gleaming, sun-lit office block with a grid of faceless windows. "But", you might be saying, "this block is in shadows". Yes it is, but that reflects my downcast demeanour at the probable outcome of the election. They say that people get the government they deserve. Well, I'm not aware of having done anything so awful that I deserve a government led by an ex-PR man who appears to be a political naif, and so lightweight as to be in danger of floating away in a cloud of his own hot air.

photograph & text (c) T. Boughen

Camera: Olympus E510
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 11mm (22mm/35mm equiv.)
F No: f6.3
Shutter Speed: 1/250
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation: -0.7 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

The significance of man

click photo to enlarge
"The significance of man is that he is insignificant and is aware of it."
Carl Becker (1873-1945), U.S. historian

If only! Carl Becker was right to emphasise a high level of self-awareness as one of the things that separates man from other living organisms. However, one wonders whether, had he been living in the last quarter of the twentieth century, or today, he would have been so easy in penning those last five words. It's true that a large section of mankind as a whole, in terms of much of its art, philosophy and religion, recognises its own unimportance in the grand scheme of things. But, at an individual level, there are too many inhabitants of this planet who think that they are the centre of the universe and that all else revolves around them.

It was always thus of course, to a greater or lesser degree. Yet I can't help but think it very strange that at a time when we know our position in the universe so much better than ever before, and we are aware of our place in our community, society, country, continent and world as never before, our species seems to be more self-centred and self-important than at any time in our history. We consume the earth's resources with a wilful disregard for the future, seek through riches to provide all our own needs and wants and sefishly divorce ourselves from our communities, and try our best to achieve economic and social advantage for our offspring with little regard for others. Our politicians - if the current campaigning for next week's general election in the UK is anything to go by - seek to be elected by appealing directly to this self-centred attitude, with no clear political philosophy, vision or thought of building a community in which all can share, prosper and be fulfilled, featuring anywhere in their manifestos. We seem to be well on the way to becoming a society that only considers "what's in it for me", full of too many individuals who think themselves the only significant actor in their personal universe. No, Carl Becker, surely couldn't have written that sentence in 2010.

Today's photograph of two parents with their small children, walking in a sunlit slice of the beach at Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, reminded me of that quotation, and prompted today's rather pessimistic reflection. There's nothing like the open sky, the vastness of the sea and an empty beach to give a proper significance to the human form. I composed this shot with wide zoom lens near its widest setting to emphasise the smallness of the people in their location.

photograph & text (c) T. Boughen

Camera: Olympus E510
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 21mm (42mm/35mm equiv.)
F No: f5.6
Shutter Speed: 1/4000
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation: -1.3 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

Montgomery Burns on the BBC

click photo to enlarge
The Reith Lectures is an annual series of radio lectures on the BBC given by a person of national or international standing. This year Montgomery Burns, the owner of Springfield nuclear power plant on the TV cartoon show, The Simpsons, was invited to address the nation on the subject of "A New Citizenship". If you find it hard to believe that a figment of Matt Groening's imagination is capable of fulfilling a role previously given to the likes of Bertrand Russell, Robert Oppenheimer, Nikolaus Pevsner, John K. Galbraith, A.H. Halsey and Richard Rogers, then perhaps I should explain that the speaker that Burns' character is allegedly based on was the man who recently delivered the four, 45 minute lectures.

Michael Sandel is an American academic, the Harvard Professor of Government, who teaches political philosophy. He is particularly adept at making his subject relevant to the issues of the day, and at writing in a way that engages the layman as well as a more specialist audience. Apparently he was chosen as the model for Mongomery Burns because he teaches a renowned course on Justice, and the joke is that the nuclear power magnate is the least just character in The Simpsons.

The 2009 Reith Lectures were delivered under four headings: Markets and Morals, Morality in Politics, Genetics and Morality, and A New Politics of the Common Good. All were interesting, but the first lecture appealed to me most because it spoke of a theme that I've touched on in this blog. In his talk he is sceptical of the drive to make public services emulate competitive market models, and critical of the intellectual arrogance of the pro-market lobby, pointing out the many theoretical and actual failings of the system they promote. At the centre of his critique is his exposure of the way neo-liberals try to shore up their arguments by appropriating ethical arguments that have no place in their theories. He is particularly penetrating in his analysis of how the exposure of a variety of public goods to market forces can change them and society for the worse. From my perspective it's interesting that such arguments come from someone who works in the country that, for many, embodies the views that he debunks. The lectures are available on the BBC website either as audio downloads or transcripts.

I could weave a connection between Montgomery Burns and today's photograph of a view from the bottom of a wind turbine looking upwards, but I'll spare you that conceit, and simply say that a lovely sky took me to an area where thirteen turbines stand, and I determined to find a new way to portray one of these interesting and imposing structures.

photograph & text (c) T. Boughen

Camera: Olympus E510
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 11mm (22mm/35mm equiv.)
F No: f11
Shutter Speed: 1/320 seconds
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation: -0.7 EV
Image Stabilisation: On