Liturgy Historicised

As we approach Maundy Thursday, the night of Jesus' Last Supper, I thought I'd post a few reflections on the development of the tradition.

The form of words in modern liturgies varies a little between denominations, but follows, more or less, the pattern in the Anglican Common Worship; there we find the words:

who, in the same night that he was betrayed, took bread and gave you thanks; he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying: Take, eat; this is my body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of me.

In the same way, after supper he took the cup and gave you thanks; he gave it to them, saying: Drink this, all of you; this is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.
Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.

This follows very closely the earliest account of the liturgy which is found in the letter of Paul to the church at Corinth, writing about 55 AD, about twenty two years after the crucifixion:

For I received from the Lord the teaching that I passed on to you: that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took a piece of bread, gave thanks to God, broke  it, and said, "This is my body, which is for you. Do this in memory of me."  In the same way, after the supper he took the cup and said, "This cup is God's new covenant, sealed with my blood. Whenever you drink it, do so in memory of me." This means that every time you eat this bread and drink from this cup you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. (1Corinthians 11:23-26)

Given the strong links between Luke's Gospel, Acts, and the Pauline ministry, it is not surprising that the version in the Gospel of Luke resembles this most strongly:

Then he took a piece of bread, gave thanks to God, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in memory of me." In the same way, he gave them the cup after the supper, saying, "This cup is God's new covenant sealed with my blood, which is poured out for you. (Luke 22:19-20)

The gospels, of course, come a considerable time after the letter of Paul, and the earliest, Mark (written probably some time between AD 64 and 69), has a version which differs in a significant details:

While they were eating, Jesus took a piece of bread, gave a prayer of thanks, broke it, and gave it to his disciples. "Take it," he said, "this is my body." Then he took a cup, gave thanks to God, and handed it to them; and they all drank from it. Jesus said, "This is my blood which is poured out for many, my blood which seals God's covenant. I tell you, I will never again drink this wine until the day I drink the new wine in the Kingdom of God." Then they sang a hymn and went out to the Mount of Olives. (Mark 14:22-26)

Because of the way in which the reader often reads back into a text a later liturgical tradition, the differences between this and the Pauline account are not often noticed. But in both Paul and Luke (who seems to be following this earlier tradition), there is a hiatus between the bread and the wine. The breaking of the bread occurs within the context meal, and it is "after the supper" that the wine is given.

But while the later liturgy mentions the Pauline account, it actually follows the Marcan narrative - in which the wine follows on from the bread immediately, with no reference to "after the supper" - and the communicants takes bread, then wine, one after the other. Moreover only the Paul / Lucan narrative has the "do this in memory" text.

The gospel of Matthew also follows the Marcan narrative, with the eating of the bread bread and partaking of the wine following immediately after each other:

While they were eating, Jesus took a piece of bread, gave a prayer of  thanks, broke it, and gave it to his disciples. "Take and eat it," he said; "this is my body." Then he took a cup, gave thanks to God, and gave it to them. "Drink it, all of you," he said; "this is my blood, which seals God's covenant, my blood poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will never again drink this wine until the day I drink the new wine with you in my Father's Kingdom." (Matthew 26:26-29)

It is likely that the Marcan narrative, taken over by Matthew, reflects a later liturgical practice which was in use when the gospels were given; Luke uses an earlier and more primitive source. Both Mark and Matthew conflate the bread and wine into a consecutive act - this is most likely to be the actual liturgical practice feeding back into the historical narrative and distorting it. To adapt an idea from Dominic Crossan, we might call this "liturgy historicised".

We see a similar but contrasting historical development, in the Western tradition where the practice of baptism / confirmation was split apart in time.

Unfortunately history has left little clues as to early liturgical practice after the gospels. The Didache, an early 2nd century book giving guidelines for the Christian community, simply mentions "eat or drink of your Eucharist" without giving any actual forms, although it does give prayers over the wine and bread before the communicants took the bread and wine:

Celebrate the Eucharist as follows: Say over the cup: "we give you thanks, Father, for the holy vine of David, your servant, which you made known to us through Jesus your servant. To you be glory for ever".

Over the broken bread say: "we give you thanks, Father, for the life and the knowledge which you have revealed to us through Jesus your servant. To you be glory for ever. As this broken bread scattered on the mountains was gathered and became one, so too, may your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom. For glory and power are yours through Jesus Christ for ever".

It is not until we get to Justin Martyr, much later in 2nd century, that we have a more detailed form, which reflects the Marcan narrative rather than the Pauline one.

Indeed, the Apostles, in the records left by them which are called gospels, handed on that it was commanded to them in this manner: Jesus, having taken bread and given thanks said, ``Do this in memory of me, this is my body.'' Likewise, having taken the cup and given thanks, he said, ``This is my blood'', and he gave it to them alone.

By the time we reach the Homilies of Ephraim, dating from around 338-373 AD, there is a whole panoply of ceremonial - mixing of water and wine, signing the cup,

After the disciples had eaten the new and holy Bread, and when they understood by faith they had eaten of Christ's body, Christ went on to explain and to give them the whole Sacrament. He took and mixed a cup of wine. Then He blessed it, and signed it, and made it holy, declaring that it was His own Blood, which was about to be poured out . . . Christ commanded them to drink, and He explained to them that the cup which they were drinking was His own Blood: `This is truly My Blood, which is shed for all of you. Take, all of you, drink of this, because it is a new covenant in My Blood. As you have seen me do, do you also in My memory. whenever you gather together in My name in Churches everywhere, do what I have done, in memory of Me. Eat My body, and drink My Blood.'

Where the mixing of wine and water come from is uncertain, although the pre-existent Wisdom in Proverbs 9:1-5 has the verse "Come, eat of my bread and drink of the wine I have mixed.". Moreover the Talmud - the oral traditions of the Jews  - dating from about 200 BC to AD 200 - includes an instruction concerning wine in Shabbath 77a, which states that wine which does not carry at least 3 parts of water is not wine, and the Rabbinical tradition taught that wine, unless mixed with water, could not be blessed. So although there is no evidence for this in the early narratives, it would have been such an accepted part of Judaism at the time of Jesus as to go unmentioned; wine was simply not drunk without water.

As this is also found as commonplace in the ancient world as well - "We call a mixture wine, though the larger of the component parts is water" says Plutarch - it is very likely that it would have been part of the primitive tradition. Unlike other Jewish traditions which are mentioned in the gospels where they address a gentile audience, this would have been so much a part of the common culture as to not need that kind of explanation.

On the other hand, the term "signed it", by this stage, almost certainly had its modern form of making the sign of the cross, as we know from AD 303 that the Christians had been observed making the sign of the cross by pagan priests celebrating imperial sacrifices, for which they were blamed for the failure of the sacrifices, and the Diocletian persecution began. It is, of course,  completely anachronistic, and shows how far liturgy had developed from the original historical tradition.

RIP: Elisabeth Sladen

Doctor Who star Elisabeth Sladen, who was also in spin-off series The Sarah Jane Adventures, has died aged 63. Sladen appeared as Doctor Who assistant Sarah Jane Smith in the BBC television sci-fi series between 1973 and 1976 opposite Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker. In more recent times the Liverpool-born actress had appeared in four series of The Sarah Jane Adventures on children's channel CBBC.

Sladen, who had a daughter, had been battling cancer for some time. Sladen first appeared as Sarah Jane alongside the third Doctor, Jon Pertwee, and stayed for three-and-a-half seasons, also working with the fourth Doctor, Tom Baker. Her character, a journalist, was renowned for being inquisitive and stronger than some of the Doctor's other assistants. After her time in the Tardis, Sladen returned to her native Liverpool where she worked in theatre.

She returned to the role on several occasions over the years and was given her own spin-off series on CBBC in 2007, in which she appeared with the most recent two Doctors, David Tennant and Matt Smith.

A BBC spokesman said: "It is with much sadness that we can announce Elisabeth Sladen, the much-loved actress best known for her role as Sarah Jane Smith in Doctor Who and CBBC's The Sarah Jane Adventures, passed away this morning. She was 63." CBBC controller Damian Kavanagh said he was "deeply saddened and shocked by the news of Lis's untimely death". "Lis brought joy, excitement and a sense of wonder to her many fans in her role as Sarah Jane Smith. She was adored by our young audience and I know all of them will miss her as much as I will," he said.

Russell T Davies, the creator of The Sarah Jane Adventures, said: "I absolutely loved Lis. She was funny and cheeky and clever and just simply wonderful. The universe was lucky to have Sarah Jane Smith, the world was lucky to have Lis." Sladen leaves actor husband Brian
Miller and daughter Sadie.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13137674  

I remember the Doctor Who Radio Times special magazine which came out in the 1970s, which listed all the stories, and gave a preview with pictures of the final Jon Pertwee season. There was Lis Sladen, her hair cropped very neatly, in a trouser suit, by the side of some Mediaeval Tower. The previous companion, Jo Grant, played by Katie Manning, had been adorable, and wore wonderfully fashionable clothes, and this new companion looked to be more staid and serious, with perhaps less overt sex appeal - as a teenager, watching Doctor Who, that kind of thing was important!

But as it turned out, with the debut of her first story, "The Time Warrior", she won me over with her wonderful portrayal of  Sarah Jane Smith, both gutsy and vulnerable, and with her brilliantly expressive voice. As she made the transition to Tom Baker, her woman's liberation image, very much in the forefront with Pertwee, especially in stories like "The Monster of Peladon" became softened, and her hair became longer, with a softer, less severe cut.

But just as she bounced off Pertwee, she was the ideal companion for the early Tom Baker, and grounded his somewhat offbeat performance, giving it the edge of realism that it needed. She could also give a good performance of alien possession, and did so in a number of stories. I doted on her, adored her, and was devastated when she left Doctor Who.

It was wonderful, too, to see her back in "The Five Doctors", although her choice of lurid pink clothes, or more probably the production team's, seemed slightly at odds with her character. She was very badly served in the dreadful "K9 and Company", where the same team made the mistake of anchoring the story around the robot dog, and not her character. And that, I thought, was that.

Then in David Tennant's first season as the Doctor, she turned up in "School Reunion", a brilliant script that explored what it was like after you had left the Doctor - or he had dumped you, and the emotional upheaval of that, and meeting his new companion - your replacement. Of course there had to be alien monsters, but the heart of the story was also Elisabeth Sladen's wonderful performance, not a repeat of her past, but Sarah Jane as she would be after that kind of history. And she was wearing the right sort of clothes as well, the sort you would expect that character to wear - the lurid pink was gone; this team had got it so right.

She returned for two shorter cameo performances with Tennant, and by then had also her own spin off series, this time focusing on human relations rather than robot dogs - unlike John Nathan Turner, Russell T Davies knew and understood where the heart of the story telling should be, with human beings, and wisely kept K9 to a cameo. There were wonderful stories, and she was finally the main character, with her own
younger companions.

She successfully bridged the old and new series of Doctor Who, in a way that not many past companions could have done, and seemed almost timeless, so it was a considerable shock to see that she had died, so suddenly, of cancer. But while Doctor Who goes on, and there are still DVDs of her in Doctor Who, she will still win admiration for creating a real human being from what can often be something of a cipher of a role, that of companion. She also demonstrated in "The Sarah Jane Adventures" that she also had the charisma to take the leading part, as well. Alas, there will be no more "Sarah Jane Adventures", but there is a considerable body of work there that demonstrates just how good she was, and what a void she will leave behind in her passing.

Wishing condolences to her husband and daughter.

Take up your cross

As we approach Good Friday, I'd like to look back at one kind of gospel text which mentions "the cross", and consider it historically. It is difficult for us to put ourselves in the mindset of the ancient world, where crucifixion was a mark of shame, of public humiliation and terror, and had no religious connotations at all. The ritual humiliation actually began before the crucifixion proper:

Before the execution, the victim was scourged (Mark 15.15; War 5.11.449-51). He then had to carry the transverse beam (patibulum) to the place of execution (John 19.17), and was nailed through hands and feet to the cross (see Luke 24.39; John 20.25), from which a wooden peg protruded to support the body; some of these literary details are confirmed by archaeological finds of the bones of crucifixion victims.(1)

One account - reported of the scourging of another Jewish rebel by Josephus - mentions how he was scourged until the bone showed. This wasn't just whipping, it was tearing at the flesh.  It was horrific.

According to ancient historians such as Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus, various kinds of crucifixion (e.g., impalement) were used by the Assyrians, Scythians, Phoenicians, and Persians (see also Ezra 6.11). The practice of crucifixion was taken over by Alexander the Great and his successors, and especially by the Romans, who reserved it for slaves in cases of robbery and rebellion. Roman citizens could be punished in this way only for the crime of high treason. In the Roman provinces crucifixion served as a means of punishing unruly people who were sentenced as "robbers." Josephus tells of mass crucifixions in Judea under several Roman prefects, in particular Titus during the siege of Jerusalem; the same also occurred in the Jewish quarter of Alexandria, according to Philo. (1)

In fact, Josephus tells us that after the rebellion failed and Jerusalem fell to the Romans in AD 70, that the Romans ran out of wood for crucifixions, which gives some idea of the horrific scale of that event.

But after the rise of the early Church, as we see in the letters of Paul, "Christ crucified" is taken as a religious act, and it is this which we find in the earliest Gospel, that of Mark, where Jesus has just been speaking to his disciples:

Mark 8.34: And he called to him the multitude with his disciples, and said to them, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.  For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel's will save it."

This is the first mention of the word "cross" in Mark. And it also has echoes of events later in Mark's gospel, where a similar wording is used:

Mark 15:21: And they forced one Simon a Cyrenian who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and of Rufus, to take up his cross

In Matthew's gospel, the small band of disciples has been replaced with a crowd, but the same saying occurs:

Matt 16.24 Then Jesus told his disciples, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.  For whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

and Luke retains the crowds, but adds the word "daily", clearly making of this a metaphor for the discipline of the daily Christian life by glossing the meaning:

Luke 9.23 And he said to all, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake, he will save it.

Matthew also has the phrase in another context, linked to Jesus making a division between the demands of family and the demands of following him, which has, in Christian based religious cults and closed denominations (like the Plymouth brethren) been used as a means of forcing obedience over ties of family, and cutting off those family ties:

Matt 10.37 He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.

This is taken up and repeated by Luke:

Luke 14.26 If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.  Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple.

And interestingly, the Gospel of Thomas has this context, and not the other version of the saying:

55 Jesus said, "Whoever does not hate his father and his mother cannot become a disciple to Me. And whoever does not hate his brothers and sisters and take up his cross in My way will not be worthy of Me

But the main problem with this saying is that it has no religious meaning in its context. It only makes sense after the events of the passion when Jesus has been crucified.

At the time before the crucifixion, in the context when it is spoken, it wouldn't have meant anything - Jesus had not been crucified, and no one would have had the slightest idea what he was talking about. It would have been like saying - to take a very English method of execution of traitors:

And he called to him the multitude with his disciples, and said to them, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and be hung, drawn and quartered and follow me.  For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel's will save it."

Or perhaps:
 
And he called to him the multitude with his disciples, and said to them, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and be burned alive at the stake and follow me.  For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel's will save it."

If we put it like that, we can perhaps start to see the oddity, and strangeness of the saying, as we have removed the later religious overlay, and the way in which centuries have progressively made the cross a symbol of devotion rather than brutality and shame.
 
But the reader usually doesn't see this problem, this strangeness, because we read the passage in hindsight, and read back our own knowledge of later events and later theology into the text. It is an anachronism - a saying from a future context put back into a time where it shouldn't exist.

It's interesting that the Gospel of John has a very similar saying, but without the Marcan reference to the cross:

John 12:26: If anyone serves me, he must follow me; and where I am, there will my servant be also. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him.

Equally, when it becomes clear in John's narrative that Jesus has made his mind to die, Thomas calls them to follow him, in a similar way to Mark, but without the reference to the cross:

When it becomes clear that Jesus has fully made up His mind to go, Thomas calls to his fellow-disciples, 'Let us go to die with Him' --an utterance which we may regard as in some sort an equivalent for the Synoptic saying 'If anyone wishes to come after me, he must take up his cross and follow me' ( Mark viii. 34, and numerous parallels). (2)

Hence I think the original saying that Mark uses read something like:

"If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and and follow me."

After the crucifixion, when the gospels were written "take up your cross" has a meaning bound up with witness and the word we derive from the Greek - martyrdom, and it fits the text perfectly well as a gloss on the original saying. It is this secondary gloss or interpretation which finds its way into Mark, the other Synoptics, and Thomas, but which is lacking in John which may in this case preserve more of the original forms of the sayings.

Links
(1) http://crain.english.missouriwestern.edu/john/crucifixion.htm
(2) The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel., CH Dodd, 1953r: 367.

Ajuda

The single word, "Ajuda" ("help") dominated the front page of Público on sale in Funchal the morning after Portugal went to the European Union for a financial bail-out. (1)

I was reading Christopher Howse's Presswatch in "The Tablet", and was struck by the reporting on Madeira. The news he is reporting is not readily available in mainstream British news media, and yet it is a news story which is certainly of significance to Jersey, where there are close ties, both personal and political, to the community there.

Howse notes that Madeira has a singular relationship with Portugal, in that its people vote in elections for Portugal but also enjoy an autonomous government. This means that part of its economy is bound up with budgets and finance of the Portuguese government.

Since Portugal entered the European Union in 1985, Madeira and Azores were given funding to assist with the disadvantages and deficit of development of their peripheral location. (2)

While the floods last year were devastating, he notes that the newspapers are suggesting that will be a blip compared to the long term effects of the economic bailout and austerity measures which will be required as part of any package:

Now that Portugal has sunk under the economic waves, "80,000 Madeirans will receive less" predicted the front page of Diário de Notícias, the Madeiran daily. That means the third of the population who are pensioners or public employees. Already, since November, the number of Portuguese families receiving help from Caritas, the Catholic relief agency, had risen by 40 per cent, Público noted last week.

According to a report in Diário de Notícias, 34,000 Madeirans resorted to the Social Security Centre in Funchal last year, 15,000 of them receiving food aid. Now, its head, Bernadette Vieira, expects the middle classes to come her way.(1)

Part of the reason for the poverty is the success of Madeiran tourism which contributes 20% of the region's GDP. Ironically, as wealthy holiday makers have visited the Island, this has led to prices rising. The result is that that locals on the breadline have been increasingly priced out of the market, paying more for basic foodstuffs.

The "four pillars" of the Madeiran economy are farming, fishing, tourism and offshore financial services, and while there has been a migration of younger people to tourism and offshore, agriculture employs nearly 21% of the workforce (3). What is more, these are smaller farm holdings:

Agriculture has lost some of its economic importance, but is still an important activity to maintain rural life. Many people depend on subsistence agriculture and 65% of the people have at least some relationship with agriculture. Traditional farming methods are still used in the numerous terraces where mechanisation is extremely difficult. The small property size (the average farm size at 0.38 ha (INE, 2001) also contributes to the maintenance of traditional production methods.(5)

And as Howse notes:

It is not easy for British holidaymakers to gauge the island's poverty. They may see poor, drunk men in the Rua de Santa Maria in the old town of Funchal, but they do not see the poor, sober families dependent on agricultural smallholdings in the valleys of the countryside, over which leap concrete motorway bridges. These people gain nothing from tourism yet have to pay tourist prices for things that they cannot grow themselves.

Perhaps it is time for Jersey to look behind the more showy political trappings of twinning with Madeira, and look at the hidden hardships which are likely to predominate increasingly in the future, and which contact with the political rulers of the region may obscure. As one of the blogs says:

There are hundreds if not thousands of deals in Euros, but millions routed out the door to feed fat salaries and journalistic chronicles alleged to offend everyone, exalt a regional misrule and a political party without any sense with regard to democracy.

And as Howse notes, a priest is at the forefront of the task to make the distribution of wealth fairer, and see that funding is just not kept in the hands of the more privileged:

Closely identified with the regional government is the Jornal da Madeira, which carries photos of men in suits listening to other men  in suits at microphones. A local priest, José Luís Rodrigues, is dissatisfied. "Public subsidies for the Jornal da Madeira", he said on his blog, gleefully reported by Diário de Notícias, "are a scandal, an offence against the poor of our country." If so, there will soon be more to be offended.

Links
(1)  Christopher Howse, Presswatch, The Tablet
(2) http://www.madeinmadeiraguia.com/en_arquipelago.php
(3) http://www1.american.edu/TED/madeira.htm
(4) http://www.ile-madere.com/cultureanglais.htm
(5) http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/TE_1475_web.pdf
(6) http://pravdailheu.blogs.sapo.pt/445553.html

 

The Donkey

As it's Palm Sunday, I thought I'd post one of my favourite poems by G.K. Chesterton, which fits the day very well. It appeared in 1900 in his collection "The Wild Knight and Other Poems". It is written to be read out loud, and I like its strong pace, and the way in which Chesterton tells the story no one else had - the humble donkey's story, from the donkey's point of view. But it can also be seen as a parable of how the most derided and neglected people can also have moments of greatness which no one else can see, in which they play a part in great events, and emerge into the light in ways in ways that make a mockery of those who would deride them and say they would come to nothing.

The other feature which I like is the understatement of the poem - the reader knows that the final stanza is is the story of Jesus riding the donkey into Jerusalem and the people laying down palms and crying Hosanna - but it is never stated explicitly. That holding back, that reserve, makes it a greater poem that one which thrusts the Christian story in the readers face; instead, we are brought to the story afresh, with freshness that brings it to life - "one far fierce hour and sweet".

The Donkey

When fishes flew and forests walked
    And figs grew upon thorn,
Some moment when the moon was blood
    Then surely I was born.

With monstrous head and sickening cry
    And ears like errant wings,
The devil's walking parody
    On all four-footed things.

The tattered outlaw of the earth,
    Of ancient crooked will;
Starve, scourge, deride me: I am dumb,
    I keep my secret still.

Fools! For I also had my hour;
    One far fierce hour and sweet:
There was a shout about my ears,
    And palms before my feet.

This Precious Life

Written in 2003 by Annie Parmeter, this poem sums up her philosophy of life, and she knew only too well with her heart condition, just how precious each day was....

This Precious Life

Every day we shape our world with our words,
Over and over again reassuring ourselves how it is.
Let death be our guide and hear it whisper
'Time is short, let go and see the world as it really is,
a place of true wonder and untold possibilities'.
So without judgement, without preconception,
All senses fully awake,
Let us step carefully and consciously
Into every new moment afresh
As if it were our first and last day
On this earth.

Retirement Riches?

The Employment and Social Security Minister, Deputy Ian Gorst, is currently suggesting that the age of retirement should be increased in order to maintain enough funding for the Social Security Pension scheme.  This means that people would have to work longer than 65, the age of retirement. But in fact, 65 is not the age of retirement for a fair number of individuals, because they are cheerfully taking early retirement at 63 or 64, and turning contributions into pension payouts, depleting the pension scheme.  This anomaly does not seem to have featured in the recent announcements. This is not retirement because of invalidity; it is simply a healthy working individual choosing to retire early.

This is how the scheme works - the States web site explains it here:

Can I claim my pension early?  If your pension age is 65, you can choose to take your pension at any time between age 63 and 65.  For each month the pension is paid early, your pension will be reduced by 0.58% of your pension entitlement. If you have built up a 100% entitlement and you choose to take your pension at 63, you will be paid approximately 86 % of a standard rate pension (24 months x 0.58% = 13.92%). Once you have decided to take your pension early, you will stay on the reduced rate for life. We strongly recommend that you take this into account in planning for your future. 

So let's see how this works in practice. Take the case of someone who is married and paying the full Social Security Contribution limit and retires at 63 years old.
Their pension would be around £15,080 a year, but because they've retired early, they take 86.08% of that, so get around £12,980 instead, a permanent loss of around £2,100 - obviously more if the pension rises.

Instead of the individual paying 2 years Social Security contributions to the States, of around £460 per month - £11,040 over two years - the States are paying them.  The pension paid out to the individual  is around £25,960 over two years, so they are around £37,000 better off (by the time they reach the recognised retirement age of 65), and the States are that sum worse off.
Obviously there is a "break even point" when what they get in terms of pension matches what the States has paid them over these two years and from then on they are actually losing out. After that, the States begins to benefit from their early retirement - as long as they haven't died in the meantime.

If the pension remained the same, it would be something like 18 years before the break-even point is reached (£37,000 / £2,100). Obviously they lose a bit more if the pension rises, but it's still likely to be in the order of 15 years - so they will be around 78 before the States benefits from this bargain. In the meantime, they have depleted Social Security by an initial "sting" of £37,000 over the first two years, which simply would not have happened if they couldn't take early retirement.

And this goes back some way - to the Social Security (Amendment No. 14) (Jersey) Law 2000, which introduced the provision:

Provision for early retirement, with the option to claim an old age pension between the ages of 63 and 65, if the relevant qualifying conditions are satisfied, subject to the amount of old age pension being reduced by 0.58 per cent for each month between the month of claiming the old age pension and the month of reaching age 65.
 
The Actuarial Review of December 2000 noted that:

The contribution rate which is required to break even on a pay-as-you-go basis is heavily dependent on the relative future numbers in the population at working ages and over pension age. In 2000 there were approximately 4.9 persons of working age for each person aged 65 years and over but this ratio is projected to fall.

So there was an awareness even in 2000 of the incipient "demographic time bomb", even after the Law had been changed.
The interim report on policy review in 2004 noted that:

Already, contributors can take a reduced pension anytime from age 63 so it would make sense to enable people to continue working in order to achieve the full qualifying period of 45 years and also build additional entitlement, say, to the age of 68 or even 70 if they are able.

A more flexible approach, on the lines of a 63-68 pension scheme could help to reinforce the message that retirement should be more flexible in future and give people more choices depending on their health, financial and other circumstances.

In discussing all these options, the Committee was mindful that the contribution period was already amongst the longest worldwide and did not want to see any increase at this stage. The Committee also recognised that increasing the age at which the Social Security pension is paid would have the greatest impact on the lowest paid who are unlikely to have other pensions or limited savings on which to retire earlier.

But between then and now, no steps have been taken to address the issue. From its inception under Terry Le Sueur who was President of Social Security Committee until 2002, and through Paul Routier's time as President from 2002 until 2008, and Deputy Ian Gorst from 2008 until the present day, no one seems to have looked at the worsening situation (of an aging population) and calculated how much worse it was because of the early retirement option. They appear to have just buried their heads in the sand, and let things run cheerfully on.

The question that needs asking is: how many people have taken early retirement under this section of the Social Security Law since April 2001, when it came into force (with separate figures for single and married)? Then we will start to have a handle on just how much money the early retirement scheme is costing the pension fund, and whether it can afford to continue.

Remember that the States will not have broken even on some of these early retirements dating from 2001 for another three or four years.

As the 2004 review noted, increasing the age of retirement would hit the lowest paid. It is really only the well off who can afford to retire early and before increasing the statutory age of retirement, perhaps the unfairness and cost to the States of this scheme should be addressed? Effectively, the Law is subsidising the retirement plans of the wealthy.

How to Entertain Without A Maid

Elizabeth Josephine Craig (16 February 1883 - 7 June 1980) was a Scottish journalist, home economist and one of the most notable British modern writers on cookery of the twentieth century, whose career lasted some sixty years.

I have a copy of her 1936 Cookery Illustrated and Household Management, and it is a wonderful glimpse of another time. She is writing to the world described in "One Pair Of Hands" by Monica Dickens, which came from her her experiences as a cook and general servant. Here is an extract from when Monica Dickens first started in domestic service:

As a matter of fact, I've got someone in the office at this very moment who might suit." She wrote down the number, and held out to me, saying: "Ring up this lady. She wants a cook immediately. In fact, you would have to start tomorrow by cooking a dinner for ten people. Could you manage that, I wonder?"

"Oh, yes," said I - never having cooked for more than four in my life. I thanked her, paid a shilling, and dashed out to the nearest telephone box. I collected my wits, powdered my nose, took a deep breath, and dialed the number. A voice at the other end informed me that I was speaking to Miss Cattermole. I assured her, that I was just what she was looking for. I asked her what tomorrow's menu was to be."Just a small, simple dinner: lobster cocktails, soup, turbot, pheasants with vegetables, fruit salad, and a savoury."  In a rather shaken voice, I promised to turn up in good time, and rang off.

This is also the world also described and criticised by Celia Fremlinin "The Seven Chars of Chelsea", where she notes the kind of domestic servant who "may remain safe and secure all her life long, out of hearing of the battles and storms that the rest of the working-class are facing . . . she will be living in the world of feudalism, whose battles are long past; while the others of her class are living in the fighting, struggling world of capitalism. (Seven Chars, p. 150)

It is a world long past, but what I find so intriguing about the account is that while it appears to come from the same humourist tradition as Monica Dickens, it is not - Elizabeth Craig simply had no idea about the world of the working class, and the idea that there could be people who might want to read cookery books but who didn't have and could never afford maids simply doesn't cross her mind. It is an Agatha Christie world, where the maid is always on hand - it is extraordinary how many maids are in "The Moving Finger".

Of course, there are new forms of domestic servitude. While maids are few and far between in Jersey, the pressures of work and finance has sent women into the workplace, and they employ poorer women as cleaners to come round and do the housework that they no longer have time for. We may laugh at "how to entertain without a maid", but the modern equivalent would be, even with labour saving gadgets, "how to clean a house without a weekly cleaner".

But at least that's paid, and there are statutory minimum wages, unlike in Malaysia where "The Diplomat" in 2011 notes that:

Almost overnight, the number of women leaving Cambodia to work in Malaysia has skyrocketed, but the crucial regulations and oversight meant to keep the women safe haven't kept pace. At best, the industry's harshest critics say, foreign maids in Malaysia are treated like second-class citizens and denied minimum labour rights afforded to other workers. At its worst, the job can become a form of modern-day debt bondage... Many of Malaysia's basic rules under its Employment Act that cover rest days, work hours, termination, holidays and maternity leave explicitly don't apply to foreign maids, known as 'domestic servants' under the law.

But back to the world of 1936, and how to entertain - without a maid...

ENTERTAINING WITHOUT A MAID

When entertaining at breakfast without a maid, have the table set with a bright breakfast cloth, a bread and butter plate and a knife and fork for bacon and eggs and a butter knife for each. If grapefruit be served, have it at each place with pointed spoon on the side before announcing breakfast. Set everything in place before you sit down so that you have not to rise in the middle of the meal and go to the kitchen. When boiled eggs are wanted, you can prepare them at table, or bring them in before you announce breakfast is ready. The host can serve the bacon and eggs, you can pour out coffee or tea, and have a tray wagon close beside you, so that you can move used dishes on to it, in order to keep the table tidy throughout the meal, without having to leave the room. Better still to keep to the old-fashioned English way of having whatever hot dish is served arranged on a hot plate on the sideboard along with plates, and let every one help themselves.

When it comes to lunch or supper, arrange the table so as to save trouble when the meal is in progress. If offering soup, have it placed ready in individual bouillon cups before you sit down. Eliminate carving and serving as much as possible by making individual fish or meat creams, or dishes en cocotte, the savoury course. When a fish mayonnaise is on the menu, arrange individual ones in the kitchen, and leave them in the refrigerator while the first course is being taken. You can make creams, custard, fruit fools, jellies, junket, salads, and steamed puddings also all individual. The point is that if the courses are served individually, it does away with serving dishes and so simplifies washing up.

But it is absolutely necessary to have a tray wagon, For on it you can have the coffee tray, and-underneath is space for all the used dishes, which can be placed there when the second course is arranged on the table. The side flaps can take the sweets or the biscuits and cheese.

Clear all soiled dishes on to the tray wagon between each course, and have whatever cold dishes are to be served ready there to place on the table afterwards. Between the main course and dessert you could rise and brush any crumbs oft the table with the aid of a clean napkin and a plate.

When there are few to cater for it is a good idea to make the breakfast or luncheon omelet, the mushroom toasts and other savouries at a side table. But that means an electric toaster and a chafing dish. Only cooking at table saves your steps for then you do not have to run to the kitchen to stir on occasion and lift whatever is cooking.

Do not attempt at any time to entertain elaborately without the help of a maid. Give informal little parties like bridge and tennis parties, and make it the fashion for guests to help themselves or help each other. You will find your entertainments go well: if they strike this informal note.

But before you try to do so you must first learn to plan a menu easily prepared from dishes that require no last minute touches, and arrange the. table and the food to that you do not need to run out to the kitchen between each course..

Nothing is more disturbing to guests than to have a hostess always excusing herself in order to mix the salad dressing, whip the cream, or take the ice from the freezer. Every meal should be leisurely, not one hustle from beginning to end, as it is if you entertain without a maid without first taking the trouble to learn how to do it in as charming a fashion as possible.

Jersey's Rural Splendour

Here is another piece from "Thinks!", this time written in around September 1988. It carries a certain bittersweet memory for me because within a year the editor and my good friend Ken Webb would be undergoing surgery for cancer. I still remember in August 1989 breaking the news to him that my wife was pregnant with our first son, and he broke the news to me that he had bowel cancer. It seemed like a macabre  parable on life and death, just as the cliché says - a cruel twist of fate. He underwent the surgery, but he was never as well afterwards, and died in 1990.

In September 1988, he was getting tired of the job, and wrote:

However, it is equally true to say that the danger of the Magazine being confined to a rut is ever present, not least because, after nearly five years, I am rather bereft of ideas and am starting to get stale.

Obviously I would give my full support to the new Editor, would spend whatever time is necessary to go over the format with her/him and introduce her/him to the abundant computer files we possess. C.I. Mensa does own its own computer/ word processor, an Amstrad PCW8256, which is admirable for the task Tony will carry on as Assistant Editor and the non-member contributors are all willing to continue to provide material for publication.

Yes - the good old PCW8256 of Alan Sugar was in its time a fantastic invention. Unlike other computers, it came as a complete package - a keyboard, screen, and processor section which used a floppy disk with a rigid case, a Word Processor Section which, while not WYSIWYG was pretty good at showing the different fonts on screen, and a rinky-tinky dot matrix printer which used a carbon ribbon.

Most of the "non-member contributors" were of course Ken and myself. My alter ego Gideon Fell came from the blustery detective based on G.K. Chesterton, and created by the master of the locked room mysteries, John Dickson Carr.

Here is one of the last postcard pieces, and at the time, there was a very real possibility that Les Creux would become a golf course - for the select few - and not a country park that everyone could enjoy, even though it would be ostensibly a "public golf course". There was also a serious move to put a football pitch at Noirmont. Queen's Valley, of course, did become a reservoir. The golf course, fortunately, became a country park instead, largely because of the intransigence of Edward Bisson, who refused to sell any of his fiercely guarded land (and he was a true Jersey miser when it came to land!) and then Deputy Mike Vibert who fought hard for the vision of a park open to everyone.

If I was writing it today, I'm sure the huge flats above Portelet would feature strongly, and the way in which the coastal scene about Corbiere has been and is being eroded by the expedient of replacing buildings of modest size with larger ones.

Meditation on a Postcard
Contributed by Gideon Fell

This postcard features a magnificent scene of rural splendour; it is a valley through which flows a swiftly flowing stream; one either side of this, the foliage runs wild, presenting a riot of differing shades of green, yellow, orange, brown.

It reminds me most strongly of those areas of our island which are least tamed, most wild, and yet nonetheless possess an awesome beauty; I use the word advisedly because it describes most aptly the effect of the landscape upon the sense - literally, they inspire awe.

Yet such areas of Jersey are fast disappearing. Beauport will no doubt become a golf course; Noirmont has been proposed for a football pitch; Queen's Valley in the meantime will be flooded. The reasons for such development are purely commercial; it is no coincidence that Tourism is in support of a golf course, and speaks of the demands of the modern leisure industry (including golf courses) or supports the proposal to flood Queen's valley while at the same time the Tourism committee tells hoteliers that they should install en suite baths and toilets.

Yet the Tourism is not alone to blame - there is a growing malaise in society whereby people's leisure activities must be catered for; leisure has become a vast void which much be filled at all costs. Moreover, quite unlike leisure activities of times past, today's leisure needs are hungry for land, greedily devouring for the pleasures of a few those areas which were once enjoyed by all. So when you see the fences going up around Beauport, remember the words - PUBLIC golf course.

The After Death Experience: A Review

This review was written some years ago in the 1980s for the Channel Island Mensa Magazine, "Thinks". Since then, thanks to the work of Elisabeth Loftus, the whole phenomena of false and implanted memories has become the subject of much more detailed experimental studies, and it is clear that false memories can become entrenched and solidified by "rehearsal" even without hypnosis, just with simple suggestion.

Memory was assumed to be a static affair, something laid down like a tape recorder or film, but we now know from a significant body of experiments that this is completely false, and memory can become very malleable. I myself have been totally deceived in a visual memory that I had about the sitting of a statue, and could call up an image of it in my mind. Once a false memory is in place, rehearsing it only strengthens the memory, and the mind adds all kinds of extra details, as if to give verisimilitude to the experience.

Given that, I would consider that "past life experiences" certainly fit into that category of fabricated memories very well.  It is also notable that hypnosis, before false memories were properly understood, gave rise to telling of alien abductions which were taken at face value as "evidence".

I've also had an "out of body experience" in which I was floating above my sleeping body, but not on the operating table, just in normal sleep. However, at the time, I had been reading Dennis Wheatley's "Strange Conflict" where most of the action takes place precisely with astral bodies and out of body experiences, so it was not perhaps unexpected!

Yet while there are very plausible alternative explanations for many strange phenomena, like regression, mediums, and out of body experiences, I would not totally rule everything out on philosophical grounds. There is a strong empiricist and reductionist tradition which rules everything out, and finds an explanation for everything in terms of cause and effect, as interpreted in a vary materialistic sense, but causality of this kind (causal determinism) is in fact a philosophical assumption, not a proven fact. It is an effective assumption, but that does not mean we should be limited by it, and it is unprovable.

After all, Euclid's axiom regarding parallel lines was and still is an effective part of Euclidean geometry and applies to much of the world in
which we live, and substantially informed Newtonian mechanics, which was extremely successful in providing engineering solutions regarding motion and gravity. But that didn't mean that other geometries were not possible, or might have a better fit to some aspects of the complex universe. So I reserve judgment on what might be true or not on a case by case basis, rather than some philosophical dogma. Or, as M.R. James famously said on ghosts:  "I answer that I am prepared to consider evidence and accept it if it satisfies me."

"The After Death Experience " by Ian Wilson: A Review

In this book, Ian Wilson makes a detailed investigation of ideas and experiences relating to the possibility of life after death. He is by no means uncritical in his handling of the evidence and yet admits that while certain theories about life after death are based upon spurious facts there still remains evidence of a sufficiently perplexing nature as to throw doubts on the idea that death is the final curtain to life.

One theory with a seemingly good scientific basis is that of reincarnation. Under hypnosis, subjects have been taken back to revisualise memories of their early childhood; further regression of this kind to before the date of their birth has resulted in memories of past lives. Moreover, unlike other so-called evidence of the paranormal, the results can be replicated - "in this regard the phenomenon has the satisfaction of something genuinely scientific in the sense that if certain guidelines are followed it can be repeated and demonstrated by people who have never tried it before."

However, closer scrutiny of the phenomenon of regression reveals various problems. If a man is regressed by hypnosis to childhood and asked to write, he will do so in a childish scrawl - yet that has been found not to correspond to the actual handwriting of childhood!. In other words, under hypnosis, the person will produce a simulation of their childhood handwriting, not the actual handwriting.

It would appear, therefore, that the hypnotised subject is "going through an act, just like he will if told he is a typewriter or a chimpanzee, because he has effectively allowed himself to become a puppet for whatever strings the hypnotist may pull." This hypothesis is corroborated by the fact that the person's understanding of reincarnation mirrors that of the hypnotist - if the hypnotist believes a person to begin a new life on death, the past lives reflect this, but if the hypnotist expects a gap between past lives, this too is revealed!

Another area of Investigation into life after death is mediumship. Ian Wilson looks at the record of the most famous medium of recent times - Doris Stokes. Initially, the conversations produced by her supposed contact with the dead seemed startlingly accurate, but further scrutiny revealed that Doris Stokes was most accurate when giving messages to people she knew well, and this accuracy deteriorated markedly with strangers.

What is even more suspicious is that her demonstration of powers at large auditoriums, such as the London Palladium and the Sydney Opera House appear to have been "rigged". Her success was spectacular with a number of members of the audience, but "not only had these key individuals been known to Doris beforehand; each had been specially invited to the show by none other than Doris herself."

A more critical experiment in spiritualism has been the sealed packet test. Here a packet is sealed up with a message known only to one person. After the person's death, the medium - supposedly in contact with him - should be able to reveal the message. The packet can then be opened, and the messages compared. As Wilson points out, where deception can be proven not to have taken place, the results of the type of experiment have usually thrown up incorrect messages from the medium; one example is a message which was "If I could revisit any place on earth, I would visit Hampshire" being revealed by the medium as "a passage from Plato on the eternal nature of love"! However, such a disparity is often overcome by ad hoc explanations, such as "he used to read Plato when in Hampshire"!'

A better test was devised by one scientist, who prepared a coded message of a passage in a book. The key to decipherment was known only to him. After his death, mediums attempting to contact him, reported that he told them that his memory was not as good as it had been and therefore he was unable to reveal the key to his coded message, which sounds suspiciously like a convenient excuse. The simplest explanation is that he could reveal the code, because the medium was not, in fact, in contact with his dead persona,
but only believed themselves to be.

Another exceedingly odd phenomena explored by Wilson is the out of the body experiences perceived by people close to death, usually on the operating table while undergoing some major surgery. These people feel that they are floating above the operating theatre, and looking down at the surgeons operating on them The experience is so vivid that it appears to be real, I.e. quite unlike a dream. Moreover, it is retained as a memory of a real event, rather than fading quickly like a dream. Wilson thinks this provides at least some evidence of the continued existence of consciousness outside the body and possibly after death. I think he has failed to consider the possibility that under the peculiar states of consciousness involved, it may be possible for dream and reality to become confused, so that an artificial (but plausible) construct is taken as real, like an hallucination.

This is a fascinating book, which covers a wide variety of "after death experiences". and provides some intriguing and controversial conclusions.

Banning the Burqa: A Comment

France's controversial ban on wearing Islamic veils such as burqas and niqabs takes effect Monday. A silent protest march against the burqa ban is planned for Monday morning in Paris. The ban pertains to the burqa, a full-body covering that includes a mesh over the face, and the niqab, a full-face veil that leaves an opening only for the eyes. The hijab, which covers the hair and neck but not the face, and the chador, which covers the body but not the face, apparently are not banned by the law. "The ban does not target the wearing of a headscarf, head-gear, scarf or glasses, as long as the accessories do not prevent the person from being identified," the Interior Ministry said in a statement.(1)

Banning the burqa would seem to be contrary to the negative idea of freedom, as notable expressed by Isaiah Berlin, and also taken up by the libertarian ideals of justice.

"Negative liberty" for Berlin is freedom from: freedom from interference in personal matters, which implies the circumscription of state power within a strong legal framework.(2)

and we find this in the kind of statements about freedom that say that:

People should be free to publish cartoons of Mohammad. They should be free to wear the burka. In a free society, men and women should be able to do, say, write, depict or wear what they like, so long as it does no significant harm to others. (3)

But part of the problem with this approach is its idealised concept of the individual as an independent entity, able to make choices with complete and unforced freedom. It's fine on paper, but people are not really as rational as the argument suggests.

For instance,  within a marriage, the concept of freedom is more problematic. A marriage is not just two individuals leading separate and disconnected lives, and history shows that marriages can become places where coercion and violence can flourish. That's not true of all marriages, but just consider the special status, and the special kind of handling that the police give in cases of domestic abuse, where they may be called in, but the beaten wife (there are cases in which it is the husband) will not press charges. If this was a fracas between two people who were not married, the determination of the policy would be quite different, and with less "kid gloves". There is often a kind of dependence, because of the emotional investment, and the
wife will remain in that situation despite abuse.

In "Inevitable Illusions: How Mistakes of Reason Rule Our Mind" by Massimo Piattelli-Palmarin notices that a particular kind of economic mistake assumes that if a considerable investment has been made in a project, it is better to invest more, even if it seems to be failing, to ensure success rather than make a decision to cut one's losses. This is a well-known bias called "loss aversion".

one is irrationally risk tolerant when trying to preserve capital.  Or put another way, once you have a vested interest (time or money) into a company, you are willing to take irrational risks to protect your investment (4)

I suspect that much the same happens in abusive domestic situations, and that is where women's refuge play such an important role,  in providing an escape.

But returning to the question of the burqa. In a marriage that is a free partnership of equals, the burqa would be the wife's choice. This is the concept of freedom - along with the Danish cartoons - that we see above. In fact, that is a fiction, and the marriage, even if not physically abusive, may still have the man imposing his religious ideals upon his wife.

And there is also - and even more importantly - one other scenario which should be considered - that which psychologists call "internalised oppression":

External oppression is the unjust exercise of authority and power by one group over another. It includes imposing one group's belief system, values and life ways over another group. External oppression becomes internalized oppression when we come to believe and act as if the oppressor's beliefs system, values, and life way is reality. Internalized oppression means the oppressor doesn't have to exert any more pressure, because we now do it to ourselves and each other. (5)

In this scenario, the wife or woman wearing the burqa has a learned submissiveness, a learned behaviour that tells her that it is right to wear the burqa, and this may be supported by religious beliefs. This does not just happen with Islam, however. I have come across people whose Christian beliefs are fed by a fear of burning in hell, and where they have violated the norms of their religious community, even after they have left, the internal burden remains with them, always present. It is far, far more effective as a means of control than external coercion because the inner demons have taken hold of the person, and their shackles are internal. As Kirsten Anderberg says:

Dostoevsky also talks about the inner conflicts of a man such as these quite succinctly in his spiritual classic, "The Brothers Karamazov." In that book, he says the one thing people fear more than anything else is their own freedom and he uses the book to show example after example of that, especially highlighting the way religion has exploited and fanned those fears of freedom. (6)

She also notes how "those with internal oppression try to learn how to oppress themselves to please the oppressor". This was a recurring theme with Annie Parmeter, where she describes how her upbringing, with a forceful father, left its mark in how she reacted:

My father used to make me feel deeply academically inadequate, I used to dread not getting full marks in school tests because of his anger at my being 'lazy' or just generally 'a waste of space'. The pattern associated with this distress can now make me internalise the oppression and feel fearful of my ignorance being 'found out' so I usually want to dodge the request entirely or run away.  (7)

She noticed how this set up patterns of behaviour, which would become deeply ingrained:

From a personal point of view the ideal of non-judgement is one that can be hard to live up to, our patterns lead us to judge even at a subconscious level; we also judge ourselves through internalised oppression the consequence of which is that we place artificial limits on our lives and our thinking.  (7)

So the notion of freedom, that women should have a choice to wear the burqa is over simplistic; it assumes free, uncoerced relationships, where the choice is free, and considered, and does not consider the kind of society in which that choice is never available, or can be questioned, along with the deeper consideration of whether it is a form of oppression which those oppressed have bought into.

"Internalized oppression is not the cause of our mistreatment, it is the result of our mistreatment. It would not exist without the real external oppression that forms the social climate in which we exist. Once oppression has been internalized, little force is needed to keep us submissive. We harbour inside ourselves the pain and the memories, the fears and the confusions, the negative self-images and the low expectations, turning them into weapons with which to re-injure ourselves, every day of our lives" (8)

Links
(1) http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/04/11/france.burqa.ban/
(2) http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0678.html
(3)
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/07/opinion/la-oe-gartonash-burka-20110407
(4)
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-psychology-of-loss-aversion-and-how-it-applies-to-venture-capital-2010-8
(5) http://www.letswrap.com/nadvinfo/internal.htm
(6) http://mostlywater.org/on_internalized_oppression
(7) Memories, Reflections and Insights, A. Parmeter, 2005
(8) Micheline Mason, entitled "Internalized Oppression" it was first
published in Reiser, R. and Mason, M. (eds) (1990) Disability Equality in
Education, London: ILEA

The Magician

Another Tarot related poem...

The Magician

In Merlin, I revealed a form
Yet not in permanence as norm
But taking grace into my sphere
I worked great powers that inhere
Beneath eternity, and yet reach forth
Up to the Old Powers of the North
But changing them in patterning
As I intone the words that sing
Of rebirth to another state
Beyond earth's desire, love or hate
My wand calls forth the greenest blade
Now rising as anew now made
Beneath my feet the flowers grow
Children born of fire and snow
And like a snake, time coils round
Enfolding me beneath death's mound
There to emerge from sleepless dream
In final rising as strange meme.

The Artful Beggar

Another of Lilias Erskine's "Breton Stories", the Folk-Tales and Legends of Brittany which she translated in 1932.

This story mentions "The Red Monks". Who were the "Red Monks"? This was the Breton term for the Knights Templars, so called because of the red cross on their garments. In Bradshaw's hand-book to Brittany (1899), we read that:

half an hour from St. Cado there are seven dolmens in ruins scattered about their neighbourhood; also close to the 'shore' (by the road side) is a very remarkable monument on which is incised the cross of the Knights Templars; which is believed to have been one of their landmarks. There is a similarly marked stone on the opposite boundary of the Commune. They formerly had a convent here of red monks. It Is also a memorial of a battle fought in the ninth century between the Bretons and the Normans, the former being commanded by a Norman Princess named Prostlon.

James Miln also has a note of traditions in his archeology paper on "Notice of the discovery of two ancient towns in Brittany, one of the Gallo-roman, and the other probably of an earlier period." Here he notes that:

Tradition.-Traditions are the echoes of forgotten events, and one might expect that some tradition would have remained of the ancient town of the Boceno. The plague, however, which ravaged Europe in the sixth century, and which swept away whole communes in Brittany, must have blotted out many histories. The tradition generally current at Carnac about the Boceno is that the Templars (" the red monks ") had a convent there, that they were massacred, and that their houses were burned on the same night on account of their impiety. The Abbe Collet states that the Templars never had a convent in the Canton of Quiberon. The place bears an evil reputation to this day, and children are warned to return home early or beware of the ghosts of the Boceno.

This is perhaps why the peasants were fearful about buried treasure and what ghostly revenants might be protecting it in this story, in which the artful beggar takes advantage of their superstitious fears.....

The Artful Beggar

In the village of Cloncarnac there are many buried treasures, and the peasants are always expecting to find some new wonder. An Englishman who had been staying there had dug up many wonderful things, and so their interest and belief were not without foundation.

The convent of the Red Monks had been discovered deeply buried in the earth, and with the help of other diggers the Englishman had brought it once more into the light.

It was not surprising, therefore, that the peasants were full of innocent belief, when a beggar arrived at the village and said that he knew of more treasure.

" I must lodge with one of you," he said, " and every night we will go down to the marshes of Bossenno and hunt for treasure." He declared that they must go out with him nightly without speaking-the smallest noise would
frighten the treasure spirits away. The moment a sound was heard, the beggar said that the spell was broken and they must all return home.

One evening an owl perched himself on some stones near the treasure-seekers.

" Run for your lives cried the beggar. " We are discovered..."

He then said that they must not go out again for several evenings, so as to put the owl off their scent. And all the time he was being comfortably housed in one of the peasants' houses,  with free food and drink and a feather bed !

Seeing one day that the villagers were growing restive, he told them that the right evening was come at last.

" Arm yourselves with spades," said he, " and bring some sacks to carry the treasure away in."

That evening they all repaired to the ground where they had sought for treasure before, but as soon as they arrived and laid down their sacks, the owl flew out of a tree and settled on some stones near by.

" Alas ! " cried the beggar sorrowfully, " all hope is over. The owl has shown us that he is the guardian of this treasure, and we may no longer hunt for it."

With that he shouldered his spade and turned back towards the village. The villagers followed him sadly, without saying a word. But the artful beggar did not remain in the village for long ! Fearing the wrath of the peasants when they discovered his trick, he packed up a small bundle and left early the next morning, before the crow of the first cock to awake !

And, for all we know, he is still lodging with other trustful peasants and carrying out Treasure Hunts in their villages !

The Gardener's Calendar - April 1863

This is from Whitnash Parish Magazine, in 1863, and here is the section that begins April, and the gardening tasks. It also gives details of the arrival of the Cuckoo, but it spells the word "cookoo".

The Oxford English Dictionary notes that: "It is a migratory bird, arriving in the British Islands in April, and hence welcomed as the 'harbinger of spring'; it does not hatch its own offspring, but deposits its eggs in the nests of small birds, as the hedge-sparrow, water-wagtail, yellow-hammer, and others; to this peculiarity many allusions occur."

It also gives a variety of forms of the word - cuccu, coccou, cockou, cukkow, cokkow,  cocow, kockowe, cucko, cauko, kukkowe, cuckowe, cocowe, cokowe, cokoue, koko, kookoo, cokow, coockow,  cuckoe,  cukcow, cockow, cuckow, and cuckoo.

The noun comes from the French coucou (originally cucu), which is a noun derived from  imitating the cry of the bird. I've left the Whitnash form in as an example of the fluidity of English forms of words - Hindu is also another such word which can appear as Hindoo. The standardisation of modern English was still not set in stone in 1863, and it is sometimes useful to remember that spellings change over time.

The earliest mention of cuckoos (in England) is in the English round of around 1240 - "Sumer Is Icumen In", which comes from the manuscript known as the "Reading Rota" because it came from Reading Abbey:

Sumer is icumen in,
Lhude sing cuccu!
Groweþ sed and bloweþ med
And springþ þe wde nu,
Sing cuccu!
Awe bleteþ after lomb,
Lhouþ after calue cu.
Bulluc sterteþ, bucke uerteþ,
Murie sing cuccu!
Cuccu, cuccu, wel þu singes cuccu;
Ne swik þu nauer nu.
Pes:

Sing cuccu nu. Sing cuccu.
Sing cuccu. Sing cuccu nu!

This translates to modern English as:

Summer has come in,
Loudly sing, Cuckoo!
The seed grows and the meadow
blooms
And the wood springs anew,
Sing, Cuckoo!
The ewe bleats after the lamb
The cow lows after the calf.
The bullock stirs, the stag farts,
Merrily sing, Cuckoo!
Cuckoo, cuckoo, well you sing,
cuckoo;
Don't you ever stop now,

Sing cuckoo now. Sing, Cuckoo.
Sing Cuckoo. Sing cuckoo now!

And so to Whitnash, and the Gardner's Notes, followed by a poem also in the magazine celebrating April. "April Showers" is something of a cliché, so it is nice to have different imagery in this poem - "April smiles and April tears", which still does sum up the weather even today:

Whitnash Parish Magazine - April 1863

We welcome April's smiles and tears as a sign that winter now is past, and the brighter sunshine and the lengthened days are preparing us for the glory and beauty of the coming summer. But through this month very little foliage is to be seen on the trees, Or in the hedges.
 
The birds are busy making preparations for their young families, and we hail from time to time the arrival of the Swallow, Nightingale, Cookoo, and other birds who had been strangers during the long winter months. March generally takes leave of us in a gale of wind and carries off' wintry clouds along with him.
 
In this month plenty of blossoms shew themselves on the fruit trees. The almond-tree, the plum-tree, the cherry-tree, the peach, the nectarine, and apricot put forth their promise of fruit-a promise frequently broken by the recurrence of late frosty nights.
 
THE GARDEN.-Plant potatoes, taking care to obtain good- seed potatoes of a medium size, and of the best quality known in the neighbourhood. It is a foolish thing to reserve the refuse of potatoes for seed. The early kinds may be in drills within twenty inches of each other, but for the late kinds there ought to be from two and a half to three feet between then. Sow cauliflowers for autumn use. Finish off asparagus-beds. Sow carrots for succession; also peas, beans, lettuces, radishes, and cress. Plant Jerusalem artichokes. Towards the end of the month sow dwarf French beans, scarlet runners, and red beet. Sow celery, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, and cottager's kale.
 
Fork sea-kale beds which have finished cutting. Examine gooseberry-bushes, and destroy grubs. Keep down weeds. Prick out lettuces, celery, and kale. Examine strawberry-beds, and remove dead leaves, but do not disturb the roots. Thin out parsnips. Nail wall-fruit trees, and keep them clear of insects. Growing plants in frames should now receive more air and water. Fumigate to destroy green fly as soon as the first appears.
 
Begin to harden off bedding plants, and sow hardy annuals and perennials. Pinch off the tops of chrysanthemums. Prune tender roses. Prepare vacant flower beds for their summer occupants. Stir the soil among growing crops; clean gravel; trim hedges, and maintain neatness.
 
APRIL.

April smiles and April tears,
Welcome them together;
Clouds and sunshine, hopes and fears,
Make up April weather;
Clouds that fall in showers of blessing,
Sunshine all the earth caressing;
Smiles and tears alternate chase,
Down sweet April's loving face.
 
Tender, watchful mother, she
Night nor day is sleeping;
Seed and flower, and herb and tree,
Are all in her keeping-
Kept with all a mother's pleasure
Each her own peculiar treasure;
O'er the mead the cowslip flinging,
in the dell the blue-bell bringing,
While the orchis decks the scene
With her leaves of spotted green.
 
Happy season! not in vain
Is thy verdant dressing,
Wakening earth to life again,
All creation blessing.
He who bids the flower awaken,
Never has His truth forsaken ;
Still his mercy shall prevail,
Nor blessed spring-time ever fail.

 

On the Ropes: David Nutt

Sir Humphrey Appleby: [discussing how to stop the PM's anti-smoking legislation] I think the crucial argument is that we are living in a free country and we *must* be free to make our own decisions. After all, government shouldn't be a nursemaid, we don't want the nanny state.
Sir Frank Gordon: Oh, that's very good.
Sir Ian Whitworth: Excellent.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: The only problem is that that is also the argument for legalising the sale of marijuana, heroin, cocaine, arsenic and gelignite.Sir Frank Gordon: Well maybe that's a good idea if we can put a big enough tax on them.
Sir Ian Whitworth: Politically difficult.
Sir Frank Gordon: Pity.
(The Smokescreen, Yes Prime Minister)

I've just been listening to "On the Ropes" where Professor David Nutt talks to John Humphrys about his short, controversial tenure as Chair of the Government's Advisory Council on the Misuse of drugs.

He wrote a contentious paper comparing a made-up condition 'equasy' (an addiction to horse-riding) with the dangers of ecstasy. He recalls a phone-call from the then Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, who was infuriated by what he had written. She felt he was belittling the dangers of a Class A drug, and attempting to meddle in Government policy. Unbowed, he then gave a lecture where he re-stated his views. By this time Alan Johnson was Home Secretary and Professor David Nutt - in what he describes as an 'e-dismissal' - was sacked from his advisory role.

Professor Nutt describes the events leading up to his dismissal, and discusses the impact on him personally when The Sun ran a piece illustrated by photos of his children, one of them apparently drunk (she wasn't) the other smoking a roll-up (of tobacco). The Sun later printed an apology. (1)

Professor Nutt is an advocate of a rational assessment of risk, based on scientific evidence, which means that whether or not a drug is illegal should be bracketed out of consideration at that stage, although he is the first to say that a "free for all" policy is not what he is advocating. He wrote:

IF THERE is one thing that politicians can and should do to limit the damage caused by illegal drugs, it is to take careful note of the evidence and develop a rational drug policy. Some politicians find it easier to ignore the evidence, and pander to public prejudice instead. I can trace the beginning of the end of my role as chairman of the UK's official advisory body on drugs to the moment I quoted a New Scientist editorial (14 February, p 5). Entitled, fittingly enough, "Drugs drive politicians out of their minds", the editorial asked the reader to imagine being seated at a table with two bowls, one containing peanuts, the other the illegal drug MDMA (ecstasy). Which is safer to give to a stranger? Why, the ecstasy of course. I quoted these words in the Eve Saville lecture at King's College London in July. This example plus other comments I have made - such as horse riding is more harmful than ecstasy - prompted Alan Johnson, the home secretary, to say that I had crossed the line from science to policy. This, he said, is why I had to go. But simple, accurate and  understandable statements of scientific fact are precisely what the advisory council is supposed to provide. Why would any scientist take up some future offer of a government advisory post when their advice can be treated with such disdain? (2)

It was an interesting interview, and John Humphreys pressed Professor Nutt quite hard about what he would advise his own children to do, and how his assessment of risk might change if there was a personal element involved.

What Humphreys shied away from tackling in any real depth, and what Nutt did not really bring up, was the problem of risk with legal drugs - such as nicotine (in tobacco) and alcohol. But Nutt has tackled alcohol elsewhere in a Guardian article in which he noted that it kills up to 40,000 people a year in the UK and over 2.25 million worldwide in the latest 2011 WHO report. In the article, he wrote:

There is no safe dose of alcohol for these reasons:;

. Alcohol is a toxin that kills cells such as microorganisms, which is why we use it to preserve food and sterilise skin, needles etc. Alcohol kills humans too. A dose only four times as high as the amount that would make blood levels exceed drink-driving limits in the UK can kill. The toxicity of alcohol is worsened because in order for it to be cleared from the body it has to be metabolised to acetaldehyde, an even more toxic substance. Any food or drink contaminated with the amount of acetaldehyde that a unit of alcohol produces would be immediately banned as having an unacceptable health risk.

. Although most people do not become addicted to alcohol on their first drink, a small proportion do. As a clinical psychiatrist who has worked with alcoholics for more than 30 years, I have seen many people who have experienced a strong liking of alcohol from their very first exposure and then gone on to become addicted to it. We cannot at present predict who these people will be, so any exposure to alcohol runs the risk of producing addiction in some users. (3)

The government's view was that if a drug was declared illegal, then it was not legitimate to compare risk in the same way was if the drug was legal. Horse riding, while it might be inherently more risky statistically, was legal, but taking ecstasy was not, and hence anyone considering taking the drug should also consider the risk of prosecution.

Nutt's point of view was that the legality of the drug was a matter of political discrimination, and should not be factored into any calculation on scientific risk - how safe the drug was, because legality and safety were two different matters, and different countries had different political judgments on what they would permit as legal, whereas a scientific assessment should be neutral on that.

He was also clear that assessing risk did not mean that drugs were safe, but  that a consensus could be reached on which drugs were more harmful than others - heroin, LSD, for example - while he argued that ecstasy was given too high a classification, because the consensus on its risk did not place it that high - it was far less lethal than LSD, for example. Nutt suggested that the reason for this was not scientific assessment of risk, but political decisions which chose to ignore the scientific consensus.

He also suggested that giving certain drugs too high a classification might also inhibit researchers looking for safe compounds based on the drugs themselves, because to get a medicinal version accepted there would be an extra barrier of prejudice to overcome. He didn't give an example, but I can thing that a medical denatured drug based on cannabis, for example, could well help arthritis sufferers greatly, but that kind of research tends to be discouraged because of the stigma associated with the illegal version.

Humphreys also pressed him on the issue of scientific consensus. This is, of course, a widespread problem, not just with a matter of drug safety, but also with matters like global warming. If scientific experts back each side, said Humphrey, then what does it mean to talk about consensus, and how can it be achieved. Who does the layman trust when the research seems to be ambiguous, and both sides can call upon their own "experts"? Nutt's reply was to say that drugs such as ecstasy should be assessed on the same kind of rigorous drug analysis that would take place with a licensed pharmaceutical product to assess its risk and side-effects, which he contended that his critics had not done.

Hacker: The statistics are irrefutable...
Humphrey: Statistics? You can prove anything with statistics.
Hacker: Even the truth.
Humphrey: Yes... No!
(The Smokescreen, Yes Prime Minister)

Nevertheless, even if there is a question over how one determines "consensus" when scientists disagree, it is certainly clear that there is an inconsistency with regard to the treatment tobacco and alcohol which stems not from scientific evidence, but from its political history which has given it a special legitimacy which it really does not deserve.

Professor Nutt: Well, there are so many myths about drugs, one thing we do at the ISCD is try to make people understand that alcohol is a drug and that is the most important one because that is the drug we should really be targeting in terms of reducing health damage and improving health outcomes. (4)

I'm not saying that Prohibition would be a good idea, or that all illegal drugs should be legalised, but I do suspect that part of the problem with assessing risk is that there are drugs whose effects are considerably less than alcohol, but have been branded illegal while alcohol continues to enjoy a privileged status that is quite unjustified in terms of risk.

There is therefore a contradiction between a fact based assessment of risk, and how drugs are legitimised or stigmatised, and until this can be satisfactorily resolved, or matters improved, the legitimacy of drugs policy will always seem to have an overlay of not purely assessing risk, but also policing morals. The exceptions given to tobacco and alcohol undermine the moral case for restricting other drugs because that is a historical exception, based on powerful business lobbies, and not a rational one.

Declaration of interests: Because this is a controversial subject, I should state my own position. I don't take drugs, as I have enough trouble keeping my physiology in harmony without adding unnecessary risks.  I would not recommend drug taking to anyone. I don't go horse riding either!

I do have the odd glass of wine socially, or a odd sip from a chalice of wine or mead. I disagree with Professor Nutt on "safe level"; a sip of communion wine, for example, is really not going to cause any harm to most people, and I would defy him to prove otherwise.

Links
(1) http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zf6qv/On_the_Ropes_Professor_David_Nutt/
(2) http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18099-david-nutt-governments-should-get-real-on-drugs.html
(3) http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/mar/07/safe-level-alcohol-co
nsumption?CMP=twt_atn
(4) http://neurobonkers.com/?p=1856

Clypping the Church

Robert the Hermit enters.

Robert: Is this a time for clippings and embracings?
Kneeling in prayer were meeter; know'st thou not
What threatens thee, and hear'st thou not thy knell?

[St. Clement's Eve, Henry Taylor (1800-1886)]

St Brelade's Church recently saw a service of "Clypping the Church" where - as part of the service - the congregation linked themselves around the church, with rope, and a prayer was "passed" three times around the church round from person to person.

The word "clipping" is Anglo-Saxon or Old English in origin, and is derived from the word "clyp-pan", meaning "embrace" or "clasp" and thus is an expression of devotion to the Mother Church, although the tradition is sometimes held on Easter Monday or Shrove Tuesday.

This practice takes place at a number of churches in England, for example at Painswick, where it is noted in the "Yearbook of English Festivals"(1954) that:

Painswick celebrates the patronal feast of St. Mary's, its fifteenth century parish church, with a "clipping" ceremony which, some think, originated in pre-Christian pastoral ceremonies to protect the lambs from wolves. The Church of St. Mary's, which stands on the site of an earlier Norman sanctuary, is famed throughout England for its aged clipped yews, traditionally numbering ninety-and nine, but being about a hundred and five by actual count. The word "clipping" has nothing to do with cutting the trees, however, but derives its origin from the old English meaning, to "embrace." For on the annual Feast Sunday, local children express reverence and affection for their church by embracing it in this charming manner.

But where exactly does it originate from? There is a common thread running through a lot of folklore, no doubt in part as a legacy of Fraser's Golden Bough, which looks at customs and assumes they came "from pagan times", even though the evidence for that is quite scarce.

The word "clip" meaning to embrace (as a verb) or embrace (as a noun) comes from Old English.

The earliest is probably the Lindisfarn Gospels, dated around 950 AD, where Mark 9: 36 "Taking a child, He set him before them, and taking him in His arms" renders "taking him in his arms as "clippende waes".

Ælfric of Eynsham in his "Preface to Genesis", writing around 1000 AD has Genesis 29:13 "As soon as Laban heard the news about Jacob, his sister's son, he hurried to meet him. He embraced him and kissed him and brought him to his home, and there Jacob told him all these things." rendered in part as "Da aras he togeanes and clypte hine".

Thomas Becket's life and martydom, dating from around 1300 has a mention of the King who came to Becket and "Hi custen hem faste and clupte"

Chaucer makes mention of clipping, in his usual baudey manner. In the Merchant's tale (1386 AD), we are told that "He kisseth hire and clippeth hire ful ofte." In a similar secular use, Shakespeare, in 1616 AD, has "Let
me clip ye In Armes as sound, as when I woo'd in heart." in Coriolanus.

In the 14th Century. Wyclyffe's bible renders Ecclesiastes - "a time to embrace and a time to refrain" as a "Time of clipping and time to ben maad aferr fro clippingus"

But what I can't find are any sources which use the term with relation to a church ceremony. There are lots of sites which give details of the practice, and sometimes of reviving the practice, but the only one I've found with a date is  St. Peter's Church, Edgmond church (near Shrewsbury), which claims to have the oldest uninterrupted clipping ceremony in the UK. It dates from the 1867 when it was "revived". Up until 1939 this was followed by the Edgmond Wakes - small fairs used to visit the village and the village Flower Show took place.

The "Shropshire Villages" book  notes that:

"A custom originating in medieval times was revived in Edgmond in 1867, called the Church Clipping, meaning Clasping of the Church. There are only two other churches in England where this still takes place, one being Rushbury in Apedale"

but "The Every-day Book"  of 1825 has this on "Clipping the Church at Easter" which pre-dates the St. Peter's Church revival:

 'L. S., a Warwickshire correspondent, communicates this Easter custom to the Every-Day Book:

"When I was a child, as sure as Easter Monday came, I was taken 'to tee the children clip the churches.' This ceremony was performed, amid crowds of people and shouts of joy, by the children of the different charity-schools,  who at a certain hour flocked together for the purpose. The first comers placed themselves hand in hand with their backs against the church, and were joined by their companions, who gradually increased in number, till at last the chain was of sufficient length completely to surround the sacred edifice. As soon as the hand of the last of the train had grasped that of the first, the party broke up, and walked in procession to the other church, (for in those days Birmingham boasted but of two,) where the ceremony was repeated."

In the "Calendar of customs, superstitions, weather-lore, popular sayings, and important events connected with the county of Somerset" (1920) by W.G.W. Watson we also read that:

A writer in the " Church Family Newspaper "  for February 27th, 1903, stated that not many  years before it was a custom at Beckington,  Somersetshire, for the children on Shrove Tuesday  to meet in the Churchyard and blow trumpets.  Then all joined hands, and formed a ring round  the outside of the church and the trumpets were again blown. We believe, however, that this  custom had gone entirely out of use at Beckington for many years prior to 1903, if it ever existed  there. One of our correspondents made enquiries in that year from the Vicar of Beckington, who stated that he had, at that time, resided in the parish over 30 years, and had never even heard of such a custom having been practised there.

The custom seemed to have spread to other churches. In Tankersley, for example, there is a note that:

Every year the church has a tradition of 'yclepping' or 'clipping' the church. It is an ancient custom that seems to have been introduced in Tankersley in the 1920s and revived in the 1970s. Villagers embrace the church, forming a circle by holding hands, on St Peter's Day.

There is little documentary evidence for any church ritual dating back to pagan times, and I suspect that like a lot of old customs, such as Morris dancing, this is a supposition which does not bear critical scrutiny. What does seem to have been the case is that some kinds of ceremony took place at various churches, but not necessarily a religious one, more a folk-custom, perhaps dating from the Middle Ages (like Morris Dancing and many other customs). This can be seen in the story of the trumpets and embracing the church, which doesn't mention any kind of prayers or clergy involvement. The same can be seen in the account in the "Every-Day" book. These early customs don't have any religious ceremonial, and they are not led by the clergy.

The reason for the custom seems to have been lost, much as the Musgrave Ritual continued in the Conan-Doyle story, although it may have had something to do with warding off evil. A comparative loss of history comes with the Morris dancing, which originated as a kind of Courtly Dance, perhaps in Italy, but whose history was forgotten and replaced with a Victorian reconstruction.

The custom seems to have faded away, to be later revived by Victorian priests, and it is at this point that it was given a distinctly religious emphasis, and the back story that it dated from paganism times was added (to add a frisson of excitement), although there is no evidence of anything of the kind. That doesn't really matter; creativity is part of folk traditions, and it is certainly well worth introducing in Jersey.

Links
http://www.nwtv.co.uk/pages/travel/britan/englnd/shrop/clip.htm
http://www.visitoruk.com/historydetail.php?id=25529&cid=592&f=Telford

Excavating Past Plans

According to the JEP, Freddie Cohen, Environment Minister, told States Members that he was powerless to stop a major development at Portelet - the reason was that planning permits had already been granted for the site when he took office. (JEP, 31.03.2010).  He went on to say that he had worked to ensure that the Dandara scheme was much more attractive and less of an eyesore than the original plans.

What the JEP didn't say was who was the Minister at the time who granted the permits. If it had been the Minister before Freddie Cohen, which seems most likely, that would have been Senator Philip Ozouf, responsible for what Senator Cohen calls "an inferior design". But is that the case, or is Senator Cohen trying to deflect attention from his own decisions?

The Bulletin of the Jersey Society in London for March 2008 reported that "Dandara wants to build 52 homes on the former Portelet Holiday Village site - 45 flats and seven houses. Originally Steve Morgan of Bridgemere Developments wished to build 140 units there but Planning insisted that the numbers be reduced. He has now gone into partnership with Dandara and the plans went out for public consultation in December [2007]"

Now Freddie Cohen was elected in 2005, and became Planning Minister that same year, taking over from Philip Ozouf. If the record is correct that Dandara's plans were going for public consultation in December 2007, it seems very unlikely that much had been decided about what could go on the site apart from some development.

It is ironic that in the JEP he is reported as saying that "we have short memories", because that certainly seems to be the case with his decisions. However, in 2008, he was putting the best face on his improvements. According to the JEP, 30 April 2008:

A BOLD and imposing development will be 'wonderful' for Portelet's headland, according to the Environment Minister Freddie Cohen. One of Jersey's most beautiful bays is soon to be dominated by a large-scale scheme of 50 residential properties on the former Portelet Holiday Village site.  Dandara, who got permission to build on the site more than two years ago, employed UK architect Sir Richard MacCormac to design the 45 flats and five houses. Senator Cohen was persuaded by the architect's plans and approved the application last month, despite opposition from heritage campaigners and his own department. He said that the 'bold and imposing' design would be an example of high quality architecture in the Island.

So much for "consultation"! The only matter he got right was that permission was granted "more than two years ago", which may put the original decision in Senator Ozouf's court, although it that just means it predates 2006. But as the Senator would not have taken office until late 2005, it is possible that Senator Ozouf passed the plans, and as Planning Minister, came up with what Senator Cohen is happy to describe as "an eyesore" and "an inferior design". Senator Cohen has, however, agreed to release the original development proposals and the updated plans, so that we can see both whether his department's input "improved the scheme".

We may also be able to see who was the Planning Minister responsible for a sub-standard scheme and giving permission (by Planning permits) in the first place, and if it was, in fact, Senator Ozouf, who has a habit of rewriting his political history as he goes through, managing also to bury other marvels as his extravagant and unilateral splash of thousands of pounds on a bimbo for the Battle of Flowers during his tenure as Economic Development Minister. Perhaps the JEP can dig a little deeper and tell us.

 

 

The Greater Trumps

A poem inspired by Charles William's book of the same name...

The Greater Trumps

The dance goes on, and it is all around,
Encompassing all within its bound
And each and every one moves in their way
Within the movement of the world, and may
Not leave the motion of the spheres, the space
In which all life has its appointed place.

The elements dance together, earth and sea,
Wind and fire, and each must be
A part of the whole, the lesser and the more,
The Greater Trumps, the Maker's Law,
That in each instant can it show
The pattern within the Universe just so.

Chief Minister in French talks

Breaking News - see the website if you don't believe it! It is genuine. I think Senator Le Sueur wants to ensure he has a "legacy" like Tony Blair. I also heard them mention Terry's visit to France on the BBC Radio Jersey, but they didn't go into specifics.

http://www.gov.je/News/2011/Pages/ChiefMinisterFrenchTalks.aspx   

Chief Minister in French talks

On Friday 1 April, the Chief Minister, Senator Terry Le Sueur, accompanied by a Jersey delegation, will attend the Regional Council of Lower Normandy. The Chief Minister will then meet the President of Brittany, M. Jean-Yves Le Drian for the signing of an International Concordat between Jersey and France.

During the visit to the Regional Council, the group (which includes representatives from Jersey Airport, the Education, Sport and Culture Department and Tourism) will meet the vice-president of the region, M. Alain Tourret, and other dignitaries from the region.

Later on Friday, the Chief Minister will meet the region's president, M. Laurent Beauvais to discuss building on Jersey's close economic, cultural and historic ties and ways to expand areas of mutual understanding, including joint geoengineering solutions for mitigating the effects of climate change by means of new technology such as the "Polar Foil".

The Jersey delegation also includes Connétable Ken Vibert and John Harris, the Director of the Jersey Financial Services Commission. During the visit, Mr Harris will present to elected members of the Regional Council, on the Island's finance industry, its strong regulation and the benefits of closer geographical connections.

The group will also visit Granville, where they will be met by M. Philippe Augier, the Mayor of La Foil Por. Topics on the agenda will include the 'Projet Pont Terrestre', which is planned to be opened at La Foil Por in 2014, and which involves the construction of a suspension bridge between Normandy and Jersey.
 
On Monday 4 April 2011, the Chief Minister and Connétable Ken Vibert will meet the President of Brittany, M. Jean-Yves Le Drian, for discussions on a wide range of subjects including wave power and the development of tourism between the 2 areas by means of the suspension bridge.

The Chief Minister, Senator Terry Le Sueur, said "These visits are extremely important as they encourage closer links and co-operation with our neighbours in Normandy and Brittany. We will discuss a number of significant issues, such as the forthcoming 'Pont Terrestre' and I look forward to a further expansion of our excellent relationship."