A postscript to this morning’s blog, specifically about Nigel Farage.
I could rant on, with a long adjectival list, about what I think about him. There’s probably not much point in that; so, just a few thoughts:
This man of the people was the son of Guy Justus Oscar Farage, a stockbroker who worked in the City. Now I know we shouldn’t judge people by names any more than we should judge books by covers, but really … Guy Justus Oscar, the stockbroker. Incidentally, and somewhat ironically, his father’s family were originally from Germany and migrated to England in the 19th century. Nigel was privately educated (at a public school visited by Enoch Powell, apparently inspiring young Nigel in the process) and then, eschewing the possibility of a liberal university education, followed his father’s footsteps and worked in the City as a trader. An ideal preparation for someone aspiring to be the voice of the people.
A greater irony, of course, lies in this champion of UK Independence being an elected member of parliament. Which parliament? Of course, the European Parliament (the organisation we are now going to leave) and has been for seventeen years. I never really did understand why UKIP fought European elections. It’s like me buying a season ticket at Old Trafford so I can go and boo and hiss.
In fairness he has contested Westminster parliamentary elections – five times. And has lost – five times. Perhaps not quite so in touch with people as he had hoped, when it came down to it. This is the man, also, who has never really been able to decide whether he wants to be the leader of UKIP or not. He was originally elected leader ten years ago, then stood down in 2009 (to fight one of his five unsuccessful parliamentary campaigns), only to fight for the leadership again the following year. He outdid even himself last year when, having declared that if he lost Thanet South in the general election it would be ‘curtains’ for him as leader of UKIP, duly resigned only to change his mind again three days later.
It’s easy to see people like Farage as figures of fun, but it is also equally dangerous. Famously, Charlie Chaplin parodied fascist leaders of the 1930s, and Hitler in particular, in his 1940 comedy-satire The Great Dictator. Chaplin later acknowledged that he would not have made the film had he known what was really happening, and was still to happen, in Europe at that time.
So, as ridiculous as people like Farage are (and as tempting as it is to ridicule them comedically) we need to treat them seriously, and work to ensure that their spiteful, hateful views are not given public credence. Finally, a question for Mr Farage: given that, presumably, the raison d’etre (if you pardon the language, Nigel) of your party is in the title, will the UK Independence Party now disband, and will you all now disappear from the political map?
It appears this is the result that nobody expected. Well, it’s the result we got and we are going to have to get used to it. That simple? Well, in one sense it has to be but in another we have to look at why this has happened and what we can learn from it.
The biggest sadness for me, this morning, is not that we are going to leave the European Union (though that saddens me deeply) but the political dynamic we have all woken up to. I have already written about the leave campaign, and what principles were at the heart of it. They peddled a philosophy that ekes away at the vulnerable, breeds fear and contempt and has, at its core, a culture of blame. The will of the people has been voiced, and unfortunately around 52% bought into the negativity of Farage and his cronies. The tactic is simple. Focus on people who are fed up, who feel let down, disenfranchised and have little to show for their daily toil. Tell them that the fault lies with ‘outsiders’. If we only could all exist without the ‘outsiders’ everything would be well again. The ‘outsiders’ include bureaucrats in Brussels, migrant workers, asylum seekers, refugees, people allowed free access to the UK because they are citizens within the European Union. There is no specific aim at one particular nation, colour or creed. Racists like Farage are not allowed to propose their views in that way anymore, as Enoch Powell once did. It could be seen as incitement to hatred, and would be against the law. So, the message is proposed generically and with a degree of ambiguity, but in the end it amounts to the same thing: ‘It’s all their fault.’ We have seen this pattern in the history of nations many times before. When people have had enough, encourage them to blame others, people who are not of our kind. It’s scapegoat politics, and as we have seen in the past, often with horrendous outcomes, it can be easily achieved. Play on people’s natural instinct to protect what is theirs, and allow the prejudices to manifest themselves.
There has to be a silver lining to this morning’s sombre, grey cloud. In the immediate future things will probably seem to only get worse. Markets and currency have already plummeted, and will probably remain extremely volatile for some time. This will all calm down over time, no doubt. But we now have the prospect of having Boris Johnson as our prime minister by Christmas. That really would be the mother of all turkeys. You can add to the doom-and-gloom list at will. The real key lies with the Labour Party. I have been proud to be a member of the party for over forty years. I remain a member, but lack some of that pride now. For too long Labour has failed to position itself in the right way to be in the right place. It is a party that was founded on the trade union movement to work in the interests of working people, to secure their rights, to improve their living and working conditions and ensure that ordinary people had a voice. We live in a very different world to that of the beginning of the 20th century, when the Labour Party was founded, but the needs of ordinary, working people as outlined above remain more or less the same. The Conservative party, and the government it currently runs, is completely divided. The Labour Party should be ready now to seize the opportunity the political climate offers. Is it ready? The answer is an emphatic ‘no’. It has to act very quickly to get into that position of readiness. Given Cameron’s decision to leave office in early autumn, as well as the appalling prospect of Johnson or Gove leading our country, there could also be a general election this side of spring 2017. Is the current Labour Party anywhere near ready to fight and win a national poll? Sadly, again the answer is a resounding ‘no’. All the leading Brexit campaigners are woefully out of touch with the majority of working people in the UK. This is one of the great ironies of what has happened with the Referendum – astounding given so many precedents – so the political force that was established to truly represent working people has to re-establish itself, and reconnect with its core support.
Another piece of the silver lining can be found in the fact that the majority for Leave was so small. It appears that there is a large section of the nation who believe in connecting with others, who are motivated not by self-protection but rather by care and concern for others. It would also appear that this is the general picture among many of the young voters in the UK. If a positive, essentially altruistic, political will can regain its lost ground (and the votes that go with it) and can, in turn, galvanise the young people of Britain, then there is some hope for the future. The alternative is for people to continue to close doors, break off connections and promote a culture of introspection. This morning everything seems extremely depressing. Things must be very bad, and unusually so, for me to feel empathy with a Tory PM making a resignation speech. Surely, in the long term, ‘Things Can Only Get Better’ once again.
There have been some recent exchanges on Twitter regarding a tweet I made on Saturday.
The exchanges have been few and relatively mild, but I was accused of being ‘nasty’ and making a sweeping generalisation.
I thought it might be worth further explanation, using rather more than 140 characters.
The dismay that I was expressing is that Labour MPs, with generally sound and principled views, who are campaigning for the UK to leave the European Union are, by virtue of putting such arguments forward, placing themselves on the same platform as the majority of right wing Brexit lead campaigners.
Such Brexit luminaries include Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage, all of whom sit within the far right of current British politics. In doing so they are the modern-day equivalents of politicians from the past such as Enoch Powell. Powell’s politics owed more to the fascism of the 1930s than to post-war Conservatism. As grotesque as it might seem, there are still leading politicians who own similar views. The difference is that today such politicians are not able to express their true opinion as explicitly as Powell once did (most notoriously in his ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech of 1968) because: a) such views are now considered unpalatable by the majority of the British public and b) they could be deemed as being in breach of British law. So the latter-day Powellites have to couch the expression of their views carefully and tactically. It is not difficult, however, to see what their true feelings are and sadly there will be people who will agree with these views. Fortunately such people are in a minority.
So, it is to the detriment of the Labour party and its supporters that the likes of Kate Hoey and Gisela Stuart journey on the same campaign bus as people such as Johnson, Farage and Gove. I fully accept that members of the Parliamentary Labour Party and their supporters should be able to argue for the UK to leave the EU – indeed, there are persuasive and legitimate arguments based on socialist principles for doing so – but left-leaning Brexit campaigners should completely distance themselves from the British political far right and should definitely not be sharing the same platform at public and televised debates.
I will state at the outset that I voted for Andy Burnham. It became clear well before Saturday that Jeremy Corbyn was going to win. The fact that he won in the first round, given where he had started from when nominations closed, was remarkable.
The past few days have been equally remarkable, if for different reasons. Immediately the result of the Labour leadership election was declared several prominent Labour politicians chose to distance themselves from Corbyn. Several more have done so since. This distancing has taken various forms, from refusing to work as a member of the shadow front bench team to using the media to make pointed and, in some cases, petty remarks about the new Labour leader.
I am, quite frankly, appalled at the way this has happened; for a number of reasons. For one, this shows us that some politicians are, in the main, in it for themselves. Why else would they abandon ship at this point, unless it was to settle themselves in some sort of temporary political lifeboat, from which they will emerge at some point in the future, when they feel their careers can be re-established in a more suitable (for them) climate? Yvette Cooper wants to focus her attention on the refugee crisis rather than work with Labour colleagues in a shadow cabinet. This is a red herring. She can focus on the refugee crisis and Europe from within the shadow cabinet. If she honestly can’t work for and with colleagues in the party, in a way expected of her given her political career thus far, then she should not equivocate; she should resign the whip, or parliament itself, to get on with what are, indeed, laudable pursuits. I cite her only as one example; there are many others.
Much has been said recently about the responsibilities of politicians. Those in a position to serve the party and the people of this country as part of an official opposition, holding important shadow jobs, should demonstrate their commitment to public office by getting on with it. In my view it is not a principled action to refuse to serve with a particular party leader because of political differences. Isn’t the opposite the case?
The most insulting aspect of all this behaviour is the message it sends to the Labour Party membership. Like it or not (and I didn’t) Jeremy Corbyn won with 56% of the party vote. Whatever one might say about how many of these votes were those of full party members, trade union affiliates or registered supporters, this was a significant overall majority, and achieved in the first round of voting. Those who choose to reject this result are rejecting the rights and just as importantly the views of ordinary Labour Party members.
Finally, all those Labour politicians who have publicly declared their hand as opponents of Jeremy Corbyn, have simply joined an already overpopulated bandwagon that will always trash left-wing thought and action, wherever it manifests itself. Whoever was to win the leadership contest was going to have their hands full fending off media slurs and attacks from the party in govenrment. The last thing thing we need is for our own people to join in with them. It isn’t good enough to play political games, and to jostle for position in the race of political careerism, with a long-term objective for some future day when Jeremy has gone away. This government is in the middle of bringing about some of the most appalling and unjust legislation of recent times. Those of us in the Labour Party should all be united, on behalf of the people of this country, to oppose it at whatever level and by whatever means we can.
Paul Goggins 1953-2014
Each year, sometime during the Christmas holiday, my dad hosts a family get-together at his house. This year was no exception and exactly three weeks ago today all of us gathered to do what we do best; share food and drink together and make the most of each other’s company. The wonderful thing about this year was that dad had all his family with him; his four children, twelve grandchildren and his great-granddaughter were all there. Several of us met again the following day, prior to kick off at the Etihad stadium, when I had the pleasure and privilege of chatting with my wonderful brother, Paul, for the last time.
Being my elder brother, Paul has been ever present throughout my life and, as my only older sibling, someone I have always looked to. He has been a friend, a guide and an inspiration. I recall vividly those Sunday evenings in the late 60s/early 70s when Paul was taken back to school in readiness for the new school term. Paul was a boarder at St Bede’s, Manchester, on account of his status as a junior seminarian, and I was a dayboy. So we would all be bundled into the car, which dad would drive across Manchester to the school in Whalley Range, to drop Paul off. Our family car, like most, was rarely a quiet environment, but those journeys back to Moston, after leaving Paul at school, were the exception. Once home the house had a sense of gloom, the TV remained switched off, and the monastic silence would endure until bedtime. The comedic aspect of this termly episode would only arise the following morning, as I had to stuff whatever mum had forgotten to pack for Paul into my school briefcase. I do remember his dressing gown being a particularly challenging item.
Being a few years older than me Paul was ahead of the game in so many ways, and I looked up to him with feelings of admiration and aspiration in equal measure. One particular feature of Paul’s early schooldays was his success on the stage, playing lead roles in Gilbert & Sullivan operettas. Given that it was a boys’ school this included, prior to his voice breaking, a couple of soprano roles, notably Josephine in HMS Pinafore. Sadly the world of the leading lady was not one I was destined for. I growled my way through the alto line as a townswoman of Titipu in The Mikado, with my voice actually breaking much earlier than Paul’s had. A couple of years later I rose to the dizzy heights of 2nd Yeoman in The Yeomen of the Guard, that one G&S work with a tragic ending. The tragedy is that the show ends with Jack Point, the jester, dying of a broken heart. I remember very clearly how moved I was at each performance as, with both of us on stage, I saw Paul, in his last year at school, playing the role of a dying Jack Point with great skill and poignancy. That was a memory that came flooding back to me last week.
By that time Paul had become politically active. A strong political vein ran through the family, in no small measure due to our granddad (my dad’s dad) who had been a train driver and an active trade unionist. Mention has been made in the many obituaries and tributes to Paul about his early political activity; attending a meeting on the situation in Biafra in 1968 at the Methodist Central Hall in Manchester and, the following year, attending an anti-apartheid demonstration outside the White City stadium where a NW Counties XV were playing the touring South African rugby team. In doing this he had not gone along with his rugby-playing pals who were selling programmes, at the request of the school team coach, at the match. I can clearly remember Paul talking to me about this on the corridor at school. The dilemma for Paul wasn’t about whether to sell programmes or go on the demo. Attending the demo was a given. His beef was with the South African regime, not with his rugby coach or his schoolmates. The fact that he took the course of action he did, whilst maintaining mutual respect and friendship with them, was an early example of the remarkable way in which Paul conducted himself politically. People much better equipped than me have written and spoken about Paul in the past week or so, and all appear to agree that Paul was able to be incisive and get to the core of an issue he felt passionately about, and that he could do so with dignity, modesty and respect for all others engaged in the debate. The political editor of The Times, Francis Elliot, summed up all of the parliamentary tributes by saying he had never known such generous tributes for an MP.
I have many memories of Paul during our time at school together, including going to watch City (notably at Newcastle in 1968 when we won the league and at Wembley the following year when we won the FA Cup). Another memory, not actually involving Paul, was when a teacher of mine sternly and rather menacingly asked me “Why can’t you be more like your brother?” At the time I was completely lost for words. Now it would be very easy to give a considered and honest response. I also remember my last performance in a G&S show at school. I was playing Sir Roderic Murgatroyd in Ruddigore and Paul came to watch and brought with him a friend whom he had got to know through his involvement in the YCS (Young Christian Students). After the show the three of us went for a drink. This was the first time I met Wyn, and it became clear to me very quickly how very much these two young people loved each other. Some years later another privilege of being Paul’s brother would come my way when I was his best man at their wedding.
Paul was a superlative man, and a man of superlatives. He always enthused about anything he was telling you about. He might have just had a cheese sandwich, but it would have been absolutely the best cheese sandwich he had ever tasted. The reason for this was not because he tried to talk everything up but because he actually believed it. And he believed it because he was a man who lived for the moment. He squeezed every last bit of potential out of every opportunity. He made the ordinary extraordinary, treated the mundane with a sense of awe and saw depth and importance in things that most of us would see as trivial. He didn’t over blow things, but saw something of true worth in everything. This was what lay at the heart of his beliefs and his politics. We have become immune to political rhetoric about so many things, but Paul’s strongly held belief in ordinary people, and particularly those who have the odds stacked against them, for whatever reason, was as genuine and sincere as anything I have known.
Paul became ill because of a physical weakness in an artery. Nothing could be done once this weakness was exposed just over a couple of weeks ago. Nothing could have been done had doctors been alerted to this weakness prior to him becoming ill. The wonderful medical team at Salford Royal gave him every chance to recover, but it was not to be. The way I look at it is, if he had this weakness, better it happened when he was sixty rather than when he was twenty, or thirty. A ‘glass-half-full’ take on this is at least of some comfort. Most comforting of all is the knowledge I now have that it would appear so many people knew what I know about Paul, and that he touched so many lives in the way he had touched mine.
Paul achieved so much in his sixty years, particularly and fittingly during this past twelve months or so. That I will miss him is an understatement of ludicrous proportions, but forever I will be thankful to have had him as my big brother and for all that he gave me.
Very short this, but a little too long for a tweet!
But it occurred to me … if a school is appointing a new headteacher, do they take into account the career and educational views of the candidates’ fathers? If Arsenal break their transfer record in purchasing a new striker, does the life of that particular footballer’s mother have any bearing on the negotiations? When people form personal relationships, are each other’s parents determining factors? They are all extremely important situations for those involved. Deciding the next prime minister in 2015 will, also, be very important. Do the political views of Ed Miliband’s father matter at all? Whatever one thinks of Ralph Miliband’s politics, and indeed whether he “hated Britain” or not, the fact is, the whole debate is completely pointless.
No less a personage than our Prime Minister has stated that Andy Murray should be knighted. It says it all about the downward spiral of the honours system in this country. I should be clear, I don’t agree with the British honours system. I do believe in recognising people’s achievements, but not by making them members, officers or commanders of an empire. Think of the atrocious acts that took place in the name of building the British Empire, and then consider if being made a member, officer or commander of it is such an honour after all.
However, leaving all that to one side, and accepting that we have the honours system that we have, it is the case that there has been a decrease in the valuation of such honours. Let us consider Olympic champions. Harold Abrahams, made famous to modern day sports fans through the film Chariots of Fire, won 100 metres gold in 1924 and had to wait until 1957 before being awarded a CBE, partly in recognition of his work as a commentator and chairman of the Amateur Athletic Association. Daley Thompson won two Olympic gold medals, three Commonwealth titles, gold medals in World and European Championships and set four world records, all in the 1980s, but had to wait until 2000 before receiving his CBE. That used to be the form. Do really well as a sportsman or woman, then have an illustrious post-competition career, then get some kind of gong, a CBE for the very best and very rarely a knighthood for the exceptional. What happened in 2012? Everyone got very carried away, so that in the honours list immediately after last summer’s games gold medal winners such as Mo Farrah, Jessica Ennis, Katherine Grainger, Victoria Pendleton and David Weir received immediate and, in my opinion, hastily awarded CBEs. Bradley Wiggins, Ben Ainslie, David Brailsford and David Tanner (“David who?” I hear you say) all received knighthoods. Sarah Storey was made a dame, the female equivalent. Yes, their achievements were excellent, particularly that of Wiggins having just won Le Tour, but come on! A knighthood, so soon?
There is no doubting that Alex Ferguson deserves his knighthood, but 1999 was a bit early. The time for him to become Sir Alex is actually now, upon retiring from football management. Have a look at a few notable football managers prior to Ferguson: Bill Shankly got no more than an OBE, Bob Paisley the same, despite his Liverpool team totally dominating football in England and Europe between 1975 and 1983, including six league titles and three European cups. Jock Stein managed the first British team to win the European cup in 1967, as well as countless Scottish league titles and cups, but was never knighted.
And that’s just sport. In the world of the arts, recognition of achievement falls well below that of more popular pursuits. It struck me only last week that Harry Christophers, who has directed the internationally acclaimed The Sixteen for the past thirty years, taking them to the very pinnacle of choral music, had to wait until last year’s honours list to receive a CBE. There appears to be great disparity between various aspects of public life and how success is perceived. In the business community you get a knighthood simply by becoming chairman of a large company, rather than because of any specific achievement. If you really want an argument for why the whole system is a complete waste of time, it can be summed up in two words: Jimmy Savile.
If we are going to stick to a meritocracy that aligns itself to the values of a long-gone and much-maligned (and quite rightly so) empire, then at least let us have some consistency. If we don’t, it merely demeans and devalues the achievements of so many heroes and heroines that went before us, and before these things began to be handed out so freely.
I’m really not sure why I am writing this. I have never been so busy, what with this and that and everything else! A couple of things prompt me to write.
The Jonah Boy
Today is an important day in that this evening sees the opening performance of The Jonah Boy by 3rd year Music Theatre students at The University of Central Lancashire. The score is by Richard Taylor and the show is directed by Roger Haines. An actor friend recently commented on how impressed he was that we have people of Roger and Richard’s calibre coming in to work with students on the course. Last year Roger directed Richard’s Closest To The Moon with some of our then third years. It was a memorable experience for all concerned. What is so lovely is that Roger and Richad were both so keen to come back and work here again.
So, it’s all very exciting. It is not a premiere performance, as The Jonah Boy has been performed before. However, it is a re-worked version and so is a premiere of sorts. So, to all the cast, crew and creatives, may the rest of this week bring you great joy and your audiences great pleasure.
The passing of a leader
This week saw the demise of an ex-prime minister. In death, as she did in life, Margaret Thatcher continues to split the nation. Some are outraged by the estimated £10m cost of her funeral. Others think the arrangements do not go far enough. Whilst some propose the most eloquent and admiring of eulogies, others choose to use her death as a time to voice their hatred. I think the death of a frail woman in her late 80s is not an appropriate occasion for expressions of bile and recrimination, and certainly those close to her should be allowed to grieve privately and with dignity. However those in public life, especially those who rise to the highest of positions, have to live, and die, with whatever legacy they have bequeathed.
I think the Independent columnist Owen Jones has a point when he notes the irony in Labour MPs returning to Westminster today to pay tribute to the Baroness, given what she had caused to happen in many of those MPs’ constituencies three decades ago. Of course, as the Leader of the Opposition, Ed Milliband would be expected to be dignified and reverential in turning up today. In fairness, some Labour MPs, like her lifelong enemy and critic Dennis Skinner, have stayed away. Glenda Jackson did turn up, but took the opportunity to remind the House of the “most heinous, social, economic and spiritual damage that Thatcher’s government wreaked upon this country.”
Another 87 year-old died this week; today in fact. He was also a leader. Prof Sir Robert Edwards led scientific research that resulted in the first ‘test-tube’ baby, Louise Brown, being born in 1978. To put it another way, he pioneered IVF treatment. It begs a question about which of these two eminent people did the most for good in our nation’s communities. It would be the Professor every time for me. Louise Brown has said that he brought “joy to millions of people.” Can that really be claimed, by even the most ardent tory, about ex-premier Thatcher?
We have all learned a lot more than we knew about Jimmy Savile in the last week or two. It has been pretty difficult to avoid the media attention on Savile’s history, sparked by the ITV Exposure documentary a couple of weeks ago, a programme I watched. I have no doubt that the claims made by the women in that programme are true. The many allegations that have come to light since, from people who doubtless found the courage to come forward from watching the programme, would appear to be a very sad but all too true testimony.
If Savile was still alive then these claims would have to go through a legal process. The fact that he is dead means that no due process has to be followed. People have called phone-ins on the radio with their stories. Many other branches of the media have carried allegations that appear to have snowballed in a gathering momentum of the uncovering of the truth. Perhaps there ought be some kind of process for allegations made against people who are dead. On this occasion there appears to be an insurmountable stack of evidence that can only have one conclusion: that Saville was an evil predator, who flouted the law and the trust placed in him, abusing children and other young people in the process. There would also appear to be very few people left around who will be suffering the fallout of all of this. He was the youngest of seven children; I have no idea if any of his siblings have survived him.
There will be other cases, however, where allegations are made against individuals, post mortem, that might suggest more caution, more discretion if not an actual legal process, not only on behalf of the individual but also for those close to them who live on. Anyone who alleges misconduct against a living person places upon themselves a burden of proof, and rightly so. This burden of proof would appear not to exist when making allegations about dead people. So what is to stop someone, over the past two weeks, who just happened to have been on Jim’ll Fix It or Top of the Pops in years gone by, contacting several tabloid newspapers and selling their story to the highest bidder, albeit there not being a thread of truth in it?
Further, if all the things said about Savile are true would it not be better that a legal process, rather than an inquiry, draws conclusions so that there is proper, publicly shared understanding of what this man had done? Based on that the stripping of a knighthood, or any other posthumous sanction, would have more credibility.
A few weeks ago I received a very kind invitation from Vivien Care at the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama (or Coleg Brenhinol Cerdd a Drama Cymru as it also states on the front of the building – strange there isn’t a different word in Welsh for Drama!). It came about due to one of my ex-students who had gone from UCLan to RWCMD. The staff in Cardiff turned out to have been as pleased and impressed with Jonny as we had been, which goes to show the legacy one leaves with students goes far beyond their module results and the certificate they are given when it’s all over. In fact it also goes to show that, actually, it’s never over.
So it was that yesterday evening was spent at the RWCMD. The new building is now a year old, and what a building! As I sat in the Richard Burton Theatre, awaiting the start of the MA Musical Theatre Showcase, I could almost feel the beads of envy seeping through my pores. It is a lovely small-mid scale venue with, unbelievably, stalls, circle and upper-circle seating.
It was great to see Jonny Landels as he takes his next strides on the road to a performing career. It was also good to see him working with his fellow students at RWCMD. It was a really good showcase; a really well balanced programme of monologues and musical theatre songs that gave each of the thirteen post-grad students their chance to shine. There were regional accents from all corners of the British Isles as well as from across the Atlantic, and refreshing it was to hear these speaking voices for what they are, rather than for what they might pretend to be. We kind of know they’ll be able to do decent RP, standard cockney and reasonable northern; they’re at drama school! But it was great to hear authentic hard-edged Scots and poetically beautiful Dublin, not to mention a lilting south Wales.
Meeting staff and students afterwards was great too. It took an instant to appreciate that these are people who not only care and are passionate about what they do, but are bloody good at it and who go about their business without pretensions. They perform again today in Cardiff and tomorrow in London. Good luck to all! I didn’t get chance to have a look at the Bute Theatre, but hopefully I will if I get chance to see Edwin Drood in December.
So, a big well done and thank you to Vivien and all at RWCMD! You’re all welcome at UCLan anytime.
markgoggins 