In all our sanctuaries we sit at risk
  • Moving House

     

    If my house were moving I’d run outside for safety.

    But what if outside were moving, too ?

    What if nothing is not moving, but all

    and everywhere, all the time,

    is being replaced by something radically new

    at a speed forever accelerating, already break-neck ?

    There’s no house left, no world – only removals.

    And my country, once the house

    that mattered most, is moving at high speed

    away from me.

    Rogan Wolf, February 2018

    Posted:


  • Just Words

    Forced to witness and live, day after day, this nation’s fraught and inept and demented progress towards Brexit – the unforgiveable false step, waste and wanton irrelevance of it, the tedium, obsessive delinquency, delusion, shame, the sheer disgraceful wrong and disaster of it – I retreat into words, not just for some slight relief, but in case they provide guidance and comfort, firm ground.

    Just words ? In all this tumult ? What can words do ?

    They can pierce the dark. We keep turning to our leaders, hapless and hopeless, for their words, in case they will pierce the dark. But instead they just add to this bad dream, ultimately betraying us. They come up with just more lies and slogans and evasions, instead of living words ; they keep defrauding and avoiding, instead of offering us the real thing. The “real thing” involves and encourages meeting and mutuality and, above all, truth and trust.

    The greater our need to hear honest and holding words from our national leaders, the worse is their crime if they merely use our hunger as an opportunity to deceive us yet further to their own advantage and agenda.

    Hence the importance, I think, of constitution, code of conduct, statute, contract, framework, rule-book  – closely considered words of reference against which to measure, evaluate, judge, hold to account the behaviour and – yes – the words of people who presume to engage with us and to varying degrees hold power over our lives, our welfare and our children’s futures.

    I’ve been told by my own MP that, these days, politicians have to swear to uphold the seven Nolan Principles of Public Life. According to the guidance offered by the Committee on Standards in Public Life and displayed on the gov.uk website, the sixth of these principles says simply that “Holders of public office should be truthful.” You can find all seven principles here.

    But unlike other professions, each with its own code of professional conduct, it seems that politicians can break their oath with impunity (though, it also seems that Damian Green’s recent withholding of certain facts relating to the pornography discovered on his work computer, broke the “ministerial” code. This last requires ministers to be truthful too and Mr Green had apparently not been entirely truthful with his colleagues on the matter and that was why he was sacked. It would seem then that, as things stand in present day Westminster, lying to colleagues is a sackable offence while lying to the electorate is not).

    For some time, I have been thinking and proposing that a more detailed code of conduct for truth-telling in public life should be drawn up. And the code should be enforceable. More than that, it should be enforceable by law and politicians and other accountable public servants who break it should be treated and punished as common felons under the law.

    I have developed this argument in a short paper and have been sending it round to politicians, civil servants and journalists, etc (though so far without any significant result. Usually I don’t even get a reply).

    But surely it is in everyone’s interest, including that of all politicians, for the language of politics to become a sound currency again. Otherwise, democracy simply founders and society breaks down. Hilary Clinton said something to this effect quite recently in an interview with The Guardian’s Decca Aitkenhead : “The ability of people in public life or in the media to say the most outrageous falsehoods and not be held accountable [my italics] has really altered the balance in our public discourse, in a way that I think is endangering democracy.”

    I have attached my paper here. Earlier versions have already appeared on this blog. It is now distilled to four sides, after much work ! But, more recently, I have squeezed my argument into an even smaller shape. It is now in a nutshell consisting of six short paragraphs. Here they are :

    Language and money are both currencies and they are currencies equally essential to civilisation. As our economy will collapse without money that is sound, so our democracy will collapse without words that can be trusted.

    In terms of money, people caught defrauding, forging or stealing are put on trial before judge and jury (in a place, incidentally, where lies are described as perjury and risk yet further legal penalty).

    In terms of words, I suggest that people in public office who through verbal deceit or evasion, defraud the people who elected them in trust, should also stand before a judge and jury and for the same reasons.

    For, as money is the blood-stream of our economy, words are the blood-stream of our democracy. They both need to be kept healthy.

    Further, if sovereignty rests these days not with the Monarch but with the People, then the defrauding of that Sovereign People through the Lie is, and should be recognised as, a crime of High Treason.

    It is a crime of High Treason to steal the Truth from the Sovereign Power, seeking to replace it with some tawdry, merely self-advancing, construction.

    I respect Andreas Whittam Smith, who still writes for The Independent. I sent these thoughts to him. He said he agreed with them in principle. But can such a code be turned into words that will stand up to challenge? He suggested a team of lawyers should be asked to frame something.  Personally, I think a poet or two should be in on the act, as well.

    For I would argue that lawyers and poets have much in common. They are both concerned with accurate language in the addressing of, and meeting with, intense human emotion and experience. Poets in residence are fairly common these days, but not so long ago were an entirely new development. One of the earliest poet residencies in the UK was with the solicitor’s firm of Mishcon de Reya.

    I shall end this piece with a further thought. As Society and its institutions reel under the pressures of massive change which occurs at ever-accelerating speed, Truth at least stays still and we can rely on it (if we can find it and then hang on). But we seem to be relying as well on a few stray and exceptional individuals to remind us of our true bearings.

    The UK is a parliamentary democracy. But do our parliamentarians know what that means and act accordingly? Maybe some MP’s are beginning to remember what it means. Yet in assenting to the appallingly irresponsible and undemocratic proposal of a yes/no referendum on EU membership in the first place, parliament failed in its duty to the nation and the nation’s history and integrity and proved itself unfit for its role. Mere party advantage came first and then went badly wrong.

    We have to thank Gina Miller, a private individual, acting at her own personal cost (and not just in a financial sense), for reminding us of parliament’s role and true responsibilities here. She won her case, but again parliament failed her (and us and itself). Still and again, following the court case, the MP’s voted for party survival rather than fact or conscience or the nation’s true benefit. Power to the elbow of any individual who takes this role upon him/herself, on our behalf. And Miller turned to the Law, as back-stop, of course. So thanks to, and thank God for, the Law, as well. Something at least is still standing in this maelstrom.

    But it is a symptom of our much wider crisis that we are having to rely on individuals in this way and it is not sustainable. It is merely random.

    Surely the real lesson here is our need for profound and widespread institutional change, as well as for transformative and genuinely enlightened policy. The trappings of too many of our institutions, as they are still presently constituted, no longer fit. They have become perversions of the principles they were once built to exemplify and facilitate. The trappings have become traps.

    We need community again, having lost it to a large and dangerous degree.  And to restore and renew community we need, not Brexit’s absurd, artificial, unworkable, delusional, self-mutilating severance from where we belong, but real change, possibly revolutionary change, from what we have now. And to get there we need our language back. We need it to be a sound currency of value and truth, so that we can trust again.

    Posted:






  • One Reasonable Way

     

    One reasonable way

    to weigh God’s Creation

    is to stand at night

    in open space

    and look upwards.

     

    Infinite dark

    vastness beyond measure

    made

    effectively

    of nothing.

     

    Scattered like dust

    through this archway of nothing

    you see pin-points of light

    called stars.

     

    But these, you learn,

    although substantive,

    are also dead,

    truly of dust,

    just nothing

    made differently.

     

    Keep looking.

    It is a study in motion

    of nothing to infinity

    interspersed

    by dots of nothing.

     

    Keep looking.

    When in the beginning

    God made the Word

    he made it momentary. The silence He made

    is infinite

    and lasts for all time.

     

            Rogan Wolf, January 18th 2018

     

     

     

     

    Posted:


  • Poems in Public

    Poetry once belonged only in open space – the mead hall by a great fire, where flea-bitten warriors sat at table with their lord ; or a place of worship or ceremony, the wedding, the funeral. Not in private, on paper, let alone on screen. Poetry belonged in the air between people, out loud.

    Accordingly, the poet had a recognised place and status in the community as witness, custodian and celebrant of that community’s particular life and history. And the poet’s words were public words. They hung in the air. They were hung on to.

    For poet and community were at one in their belief that true witness requires a language that activates both sides of the brain, not just the side that measures, tots up and chases material profit.

    But then the invention of printing came along and played a large part in curtailing the public delivery of poetic language, delivering it instead to the private page and eventually to the side-lines, even while many of us find more and more that our experience of reality is left incomplete if all our talk is of quantity without quality, sell and spin without I – Thou.

    The project “Poems for…the wall”

    For the last twenty years, I have run the project “Poems for…the wall.” It is a way of restoring poetry to public space.

    Its latest two collections attempt to bring to life and reality what it means to have either a mental health problem or a learning disability. The poems are not sentimental, nor do they under-estimate the issues. They don’t reduce the subject to slogans or figures or a list of research findings or otherwise trivialise or neutralise it. They do what poetry can do, offering human connection and comprehension.

    I am hoping the collections will be used in schools and universities to address issues of stigma and isolation, and to make both topics addressed easier to talk about openly and with closer knowledge.

    But while I am excited by what these latest collections might be able to do, I am equally sure that the Project’s earlier bilingual collections have a scope and application not yet fully realized or exploited, even now.

    Intolerance and various forms of demonisation of the stranger and outsider are returning and increasing all over the world, to a horrendous and murderous degree, even while the same world has become irrecoverably and necessarily more and more inter-dependent and inter-connected.

    In consequence, extraordinary contradictions abound. For example, we have unworthy politicians in many countries (including the UK, of course) winning votes for their regressive, even medieval notions of chauvinism and separatism, making more and more streets unsafe again, while at the same time young people from every continent in the world are coming together in school after school, university after university, country after country. Borders become walls and battlements even while universities inland become international centres, concentrations of global interchange, a bit like space stations shining in the growing dark.

    In all this bewilderment, poems that build bridges surely have a part to play, perhaps as never before.

    So much of our public language merely alienates people, even while they briefly and partly listen and read. In contrast, I believe public poetry of good enough quality can work the other way and help to oppose the forces of fragmentation and severance and withdrawal. The bilingual poems available on the site of “Poems for…the wall” can “open people’s lives to one another” – (David Hart, poet).

    Graphically and often beautifully, the bilingual poems celebrate our enormous differences – of language, of text, even of reading direction  – and at the same time reveal and demonstrate, often with great penetration, our commonality. They offer an electric connection across space.

    And people from a different background, whose mother tongue is not English, people perhaps struggling to integrate in the host country and institution, dealing with this incomprehensible delay, that clumsy requirement, can feel very different if they see their own language being celebrated on the wall here. Their presence is being acknowledged, even as their language and culture is being valued.

    And for employees, poems displayed out in the open can give the eye something to rest on – between or even during phone calls, messages, classes. They can speak to a part of the Self kept otherwise submerged in the day’s rush and demands and anxieties. Suddenly, words in front of you can open up a whole different space of quietness and outlook and inlook.

    Where in Public Space might Poems Belong ?

    You can display the poems in imaginative ways. In most cases, it helps to keep changing them, so that people keep looking in their direction.

    They can speak eloquently in a wide range of places : in reception areas or class rooms or waiting rooms, writ large ; or in quiet corners on a small scale – outside lifts, on desks, above the photostat machine, on toilet doors, in X-ray cubicles….

    And people have found many different ways to display them : in A4 perspex stand-alone frames ; in perspex holders fixed to the wall ; in ordinary picture frames, designed to make it easy for poems to be replaced ; in ring-binder files, left on tables ; on plasma display screens as a rotating slideshow.

    An enthusiast is needed on site to place the poems sensitively and keep rotating them, etc etc. Someone just doing it as a requirement from on high won’t give to the task the necessary flair or conscientiousness.

    Poetry readings for university staff and students and others.

    Here I am still talking about “public” poetry, but not in terms of the “Poems for…the wall” project and its poster-poems. This is about me as an individual poet and a retired mental-health social worker.

    I think a lot about “fraught frontiers” and want to read my own poetry to people who are “stationed” there.

    What do I mean by “fraught frontiers ?” I mean positions and roles and activities where it’s often hard to make I – Thou connection and keep integrity, where staying whole and reaching out can be taxing and problematic, and retreating into one or another simplistic black-and white position an almost overwhelming temptation.

    If TS Eliot is right that “humankind cannot bear very much reality” (and it is all too clear that he is) then a fraught frontier is a place where reality presses very close and perhaps uncomfortable and identity is threatened. Consequently, brute behaviour can raise its head there.

    The historian Hugh Trevor Roper established that in times and countries in which witchcraft was accepted as a possible explanation for misfortune, an uncertain frontier (in a geographical sense) was a dangerous place for a woman to keep house, especially if she was unusual in any way.

    A community under pressure might turn on her at any time, suspecting her of being the cause of their trouble and uncertainty. She would be accused of witchcraft, bringing harm to the community through casting evil spells on its people. A whole pseudo-legal process would then be set in motion, in which she might be tortured and burnt to death as a kind of exorcism. Did conditions in the community now take a turn for the better ? No, of course not. But for centuries, a belief in witchcraft persisted.

    In other words, fraught frontiers (both geographical  and psychological) can be places of fear and anxiety, delusion and scapegoating. In times and places of uncertainty, the outsider can become fair game. In times and places of uncertainty, it is that much harder to lead a full, rich, unguarded and generous life.

    I think that the wonderful late David Jenkins, ex-Bishop of Durham, would have known very well what I mean and he put it better than I can in a speech he gave to social workers in 1988. Not exactly, but very nearly, his “pressure points” correspond to my “fraught frontiers.” Here he is : “[You] are a group of people who are being called upon to live dangerously at many of the pressure points in our present confused, confusing and increasingly divided society. As such you are the objects of, and therefore presumably in your own persons and reflections the subjects of, a great deal of confusion, anxiety and uncertainty. Your position is highly ambivalent and ambiguous and therefore both actually painful now and potentially promising with regard to the future of our society and, indeed, of human beings on this earth.”

    In various ways and settings, it can be said that poetry has been making a “come-back” in recent years. Performance poets have become quite common, for example, often borrowing from rap styles. “Open Mike” events are well attended.

    In other ways, though, poetry remains as much a minority activity as ever, a private individual interest, a purely literary activity for a few literary types, something that a few people study at university before getting down to living. And for most people, that “living” barely includes poetry at all – except perhaps when there’s a funeral…

    Personally, I think poetry can open up parts of the self that modern life tends to lock out and deny ; and it can and should reach out to everyone, and not just to literary types. Above all, I think it can remind people of their own imaginative selves, their inwardness, and it can help sustain people whose work requires them to be imaginative and open, and in accord with the spiritual aspect of their lives.

    So for me, a poetry reading is not a discrete literary event for literary types. It is a reaching out to people at the work-face, in the thick of things, at the fraught frontier. It offers quietness, “mindfulness,” insight and connection. It can open doors into rooms of people’s experience which they have forgotten existed. It can illuminate and validate and touch. It can re-order, refresh and re-orientate. It can remind people of what is true and whole.

     

         

    Posted: