Lovely Rose of Sharon

Apologies for lack of posting over the last few days. Family stuff, and workmen abundant at Nowhere Towers.

Most anthologies of literature for school use are pretty dire efforts. But just occasionally they threw up an absolute gem, something that sticks in the memory for life. I came across this one while teaching the offspring of the good burghers of Hull in the 1980s, and it has stayed with me.



All I can tell you about it is that it was apparently found on the seashore at Bidmouth in Devon 1887 by Mrs A M W Stirling, and quoted by her in her biography of William de Morgan. I know nothing more about it, but of course if any reader knows better I would be delighted to find out more. It was apparently written by William Taylor, an unknown artisan:

Deerest Marey, I be verry happy to inform you that I am verry well at present and do hope you be the same. Deer Marey, I be verry sorry to hear as you do not like your new quarters, as I chant be able to look on your dear face so often as I have done, dearest Marey, pure and holy meek and lowly lovely Rose of Sharon. Dear Marey, dear Marey, I hant got now no particlar news to tell you at present but my sister that marryed have got such a nice lettel babby and I wich how as that our letter affair was setteld and that we had got such a nice letter deer two. Dearest Marey I chall not be happy till then, dearest Marey puer and holy meek and loly lovely Rose of Sharon.

Sometime I do begin to despair as I am afraid our not will never be tied but my master have promised I that when I get ye he will put ye in the dairy yard to feed the pigs at atin pens a week dearest marey pure and holy meek and loly lovely Rose of Sharon. I be coming over tomorro to by the ring and you must come to the stay shun to meet me and bring a peese of string the size of yur finger and be sure and do not make a miss take dear marey. Father is goen to give us a bedsted and granny a 5lbs note to by such as washing stand fier irons moustrap and sope and we must wait till we can by carpetting glass crockery ware and chiny. Dearest Marey pure and holy meek and loly lovely Rose of Sharon I be verry happy to say as our old sow as got seven young uns last night and father be goen to give us a rooster for our weddin brekfast, dearest marey puer and holy meek and lowly lovely Rose of Sharon. So no more at present from yur loving and fewture husband William Taylor.

Worth sharing, I thought. There's the obvious 'Four Yorkshiremen*' angle, and the 'kids today don't know they are born' stuff, but I was more taken by the direct and simple expression and the sincerity of the emotion. I hope they got it all sorted out and had a long and happy life together.

*Atin pens a week? We useter dreeeeam of atin pens a week ...

When Icicles Hang By The Wall

On a roadside, near Nowhere Towers

When icicles hang by the wall
And Dick the shepherd blows his nail
And Tom bears logs into the hall
And milk comes frozen home in pail,
When blood is nipt and ways be foul,
Then nightly sings the staring owl,
Tu-whit; tu-who, a merry note,
While greasy Joan doth keel the pot.

When all aloud the wind doth blow
And coughing drowns the parson's saw
And birds sit brooding in the snow
And Marian's nose looks red and raw,
When roasted crabs hiss in the bowl,
Then nightly sings the staring owl,
Tu-whit; tu-who, a merry note,
While greasy Joan doth keel the pot.

From Love's Labour's Lost, and not A Winter's Tale, as you might imagine. Brrr.

Update: after a slightly alcohol-fuelled discussion with Joe Public, I can confirm that the photo is indeed the right way up. The water seeps from the rock face, forms a curtain of icicles as it freezes, and then blends into the snow on the ground, thus forming both stalactites and stalagmites simultaneously. From a certain viewpoint, probably over 80mg per 100ml, they do appear to be growing upwards. Ish.

Another reason for reading proper books

E-book readers - never used one, never wanted to. I like paper books - ones you can hold, take to bed, read on the bog, even scribble on. Books don't freeze and need a hard reset, and don't suffer from power failures. Most of all, print on paper is much easier to read than characters on a screen.

And now, here's another reason to stick with Dead Tree Literature:

This morning, hundreds of Amazon Kindle owners awoke to discover that books by a certain famous author had mysteriously disappeared from their e-book readers. These were books that they had bought and paid for—thought they owned.

But no, apparently the publisher changed its mind about offering an electronic edition, and apparently Amazon, whose business lives and dies by publisher happiness, caved. It electronically deleted all books by this author from people’s Kindles and credited their accounts for the price.

At least when you buy a book (even from Amazon) they don't come round in the night and nick it from your bedside table. Well, they haven't so far, anyway.

Let 'em try.

(The massive irony here, and one which has probably escaped Amazon, is that one of the books in question was ... drum roll ... Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four.)

Orwell vs Huxley

Here's an interesting question: who was the best predictor of the state of our current society - George Orwell or Aldous Huxley?

For those without the instant recall of Great Works of Lit, I'm talking about:

• George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, published in 1949, describes a nightmare world of surveillance, misinformation, betrayal and fear. Big Brother is the shadowy figure who rules the state, and every room has a telescreen which pumps out state propaganda and simultaneously watches your every move and gesture.
• Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, published in 1932, describes another nightmare world, but this time it is a state which makes sure everyone is happy and distracted from serious thought, where one's own pleasure is the only duty and where unhappiness is a crime against society.

I have read them both several times, although I have to admit that I have never yet read Nineten Eighty-Four in one sitting. It is so depressing that I have always read about three-quarters of it and then had to put it down for a week or two before finishing it with a clear head.

Both books try to create a world which is a nightmarish warning about how our own society could develop - Orwell critiquing the repression of Soviet Russia and Huxley the more insidious attractions of the capitalist West. Both have ideas which are uncannily accurate direct hits on British life in the early 21st Century.

Nineteen Eighty-Four has its constant surveillance of the population, the promotion of war (and the threat of war) to keep the people fearful and loyal, the existence of an elite who are above the law, and the mass of the 'proles' who are ignorant and kept amused and in their place by cheap drink and popular entertainment. Orwell invented the concept of 'Newspeak', a reduced and officially-approved form of English which removed the ability for independent thought by removing the language it could be expressed in - a remarkable foretaste of political correctness and 'speech codes'. Gordon Brown in 'tractor production statistics' mode always reminds me of the stream of targets and achievements put out by the telescreens.

The society of Brave New World has constant non-reproductive sex as a recreational activity, 'soma holidays' which are eerily reminiscent of LSD (only synthesised six years after the book was written), and a promotion of consumption and meaningless entertainment to keep the population distracted and free from serious thought. Life is pleasant, even and worry-free, as long as you conform.

I am a big fan of both books, although BNW is the easier read. Neil Postman [1], in Amusing Ourselves To Death (1985) thought that Huxley was the more prescient of the two, and I am inclined to agree. NEF almost seemed to be a blueprint of the post-war Eastern Bloc societies, and certainly there are things in there that chillingly remind us that our rulers in safe, liberal Britain still have the compulsion to identify, trace, watch and control us. (See any edition of any national newspaper of the last ten years for examples.) But BNW seems to understand that people are more easily controlled if you make give them nice things to keep them occupied and away from dangerous thoughts - a modern version of panem et circenses. Perhaps the reality is a combination of both.

I was reminded of all this through an article on B3ta, which links to a rather well-done cartoon summary of the arguments. Worth a look.

If anyone reading this blog (either of you, har har) has a view on this, please feel free to comment.


As a footnote, let me record how sad I feel if ever anyone mentions the words 'Big Brother' amongst people under 30. No-one picks up the origin of the name, and everyone immediately thinks of the Channel 4 programme, thus neatly proving Huxley's point.

[1] I first came across this chap during my teacher training year in 1975-6, when his Teaching as a Subversive Activity was required reading amongst nascent pedagogues. Required reading by the College tutors, I meant to say. When subversiveness is promoted by the establishment, you just know it isn't going to turn out well.