LETTERS
Light reading
Sir: Peter Oborne (Notebook, October 13)
writes that for ‘relaxation’ on his recent
visit to Syria he read Simon Heffer’s
The Age of Decadence, which weighs in at
900 pages. What does he turn to when he
fancies something more serious?
Michael Henderson
London W13Party bores
Sir: I fully empathised with Peter Oborne’s
wish to avoid the Labour party conference
and the media’s predictable attacks on
Jeremy Corbyn. But his solution — to
escape to Syria — seemed rather extreme.
Andrew Williams
Wirral, CheshirePoor penguins
Sir: I rather take exception, in his review
of the Living With Buildings exhibition, to
Stephen Bayley’s reference to traditionalist
‘rearguard architects’ such as myself as
being like Japanese soldiers still fighting
the second world war in the jungle, because
we favour things like classical orders
(‘Houses of ill repute’, 13 October).
This is to imply that the battle for
modernism has been roundly won, but I do
not think it has, totally. I would note that,
had such a puritan, proscriptive attitude
prevailed in the 15th century, we would
have been denied the Italian Renaissance.
It has to be acknowledged that in the 1930s
the brave, new, modernist agenda had to
be inflicted mostly on the unempowered
— predominantly the poor, but also the
penguins — who were not in any position
to resist the cool, white, unmodelled,
cubist buildings which were patronisingly
bestowed upon them. Neither has the style
endeared itself much since to the British
public at large. Those buildings look fine
if maintained and bathed in the hot sun of
the Côte d’Azur. They look less fine in a
wet Finsbury.
John Bennett RIBA
Southwold, SuffolkNorman’s wisdom
Sir: Grizelda’s cartoon (13 October) jests
that a castaway on Desert Island Discs
can’t take the sound of their own voice as
one of the tracks. Not so. That arch jester
Sir Norman Wisdom chose five of his own
recordings, including the one he saved
from the waves, when he was cast away by
Sue Lawley in 1990.
Malcolm Watson
Ryde, Isle of WightIreland’s day of reckoning
Sir: John Waters is more right than he
knows when he talks about the Irish
attitude to Brexit (‘Paddy powerless’,
13 October). We Irish and our media have
developed a consensus gene across many
issues — without exception, all comfortably
on the left. There is no significant media
outlet in Ireland that would challenge in
any way the prevailing orthodoxy here,
which is that Brexit is an act of national
self-harm. There is a certain smugness too,
which is getting in the way of the reality,
which is that we of all people should want
Brexit to work to the benefit of both the
EU and the UK. Our day of reckoning is
coming. We will see how Europhile we are
when Emmanuel Macron gets his way
and corporate tax rates across the EU
are harmonised.
Tommy MacDonnell
Dublin, Ireland
Racing certainty
Sir: Robin Oakley’s description of the likely
difficulties in replicating, post-Brexit, the
Tripartite Agreement between the UK,
Ireland and France (The turf, 13 October)
fails to make an obvious point.
It is patently absurd that an
arrangement between three sovereign
states, each with more or less identical
interests, should be subject to the
agreement of 25 others. The blame for
any disruption resulting from a failure to
continue the Agreement will lie not with
those who are trying to implement Brexit,
but with those who allowed, or required,
the TPA to become part of EU law in the
first place.
No doubt in the short term there will be
annoyance and perhaps serious disruption,
in this and many other areas. But in the
long run we will all benefit from being free
from this narrow-minded tyranny.
Michael O’Shea
London N16
The Archbishop’s witness
Sir: Your correspondent Jane Moth throws
doubt on the willingness or ability of the
Archbishop of Canterbury to impart the
joy of the Gospel (Letters, 13 October).
At the launch of an evangelising initiative,
I recall him telling us that his mantra before
every media interview is ‘How can I get
the love of Jesus into this?’ Whether that
portion of the interview survives the editing
process is, of course, beyond his control.
I spend some of my time at General
Synod as a thorn in Archbishop Justin’s
side on the issue of safeguarding, arguing
that we need to relieve him of that
burden and to outsource responsibility
to independent specialists. Part of my
reason for doing so is entirely sympathetic.
Having heard the warmth and integrity of
his witness, we need to liberate him and
his fellow bishops to concentrate on those
areas where their talents and enthusiasms
undoubtedly lie.
Martin Sewell, General Synod
Gravesend, KentMeat not wheat
Sir: Keith O’Neill’s proclamation from
the moral high ground that his vegan
diet ‘tortures’ no animals (Letters, 13
October) suggests he should spend some
time on a mixed farm like mine, where
I grow livestock and arable crops. I could
show him a thing or two about having to
kill animals — but unfortunately for the
vegans, the carnage is in the production of
wheat, not meat. Somehow, the multitude
of animals that have to die to ensure bread
production don’t feature on the vegan care
radar, possibly because they’re not cuddly.
Charlie Flindt
Hinton Ampner, HampshireƐsáìʴâĮħLAND IN THE
HEART OF
LONDON CITY
Convenient twice daily*
ƐċĂĈŞŖāŐĮħáìŐèììĨ
to London City
ʫ>ÆŖŞŐÆâĞÆĨèġĮţĨĂìÆââìŖŖ
ÆŞáìŐèììĨċŐōĮŐŞ
ʫ ĮħōġċħìĨŞÆŐsĮĨáĮÆŐè
èŐċĨĞŖÆĨèŖĨÆâĞŖ
ʫ>ÆŐìŖāŐĮħ˫ʗʘʴʘʘʨ
ʫÂĮĨÆġÆĨèʓˇʓˇʒŐĮţŞìōÆŖŖìŖ
ÆŸÆċġÆáġìŞĮáìĨìƏŞŐìĂţġÆŐ
ŞŐÆŸìġġìŐŖʨhĨìŹÆsċĨâġţèċĨĂŞÆžìŖÆĨèâĈÆŐĂìŖʴţáěì⪪Į
ÆŸÆċġÆáċġċŞsÆĨèâĈÆĨĂìʴŹċâì&Æċġs˅aĮĨèÆsŞĮ>ŐċèÆs
ōġţŖÆţĨèÆsŖìŐŸċâìʴ