In defence of libraries

“It’s the only local place you can come without spending money,” she said. “It’s local and friendly. And it’s classless.”

I like libraries, used them as a kid, teenager and adult. Even worked in them. During my childhood, I spent a lot of my time reading where I was able to lose myself in the written word, conjure up fantasises and develop my own imagination. It was my place to be creative and feel safe from the world outside. I have good memories of those times. It was a place where I started to understand the importance of knowledge, and  learning. I certainly gained more visiting the local library then my formative years at primary school. Libraries are an important function in this society, they are a collective means of reading and learning, and that access should be equal. To me they are a basic Socialist demand. People get access as well to technology such as the computers and the internet (Stats from 2009 show that 38 per cent of households owned a home computer and 30 per cent who had an internet connection are in the lowest income decile group compared with 98 per cent of households owning a home computer and 97 per cent having an Internet connection from highest income decile group). Therefore libraries are a fantastic public free resource and a necessity for learning and support.

Brilliant and vital libraries are nevertheless one of the first to experience savage cuts, as libraries seen as easy touch when it comes to balancing the books.

Brent is one of hundreds of councils planning to close public libraries in an attempt to meet huge cuts imposed by central government. Nearly 400 are threatened with closure, and with half of councils yet to announce their plans, the final number could be as many as 800 – a fifth of all libraries.

Furthermore

Libraries were already under siege before the recession struck. Although the number has stayed largely stable over the past decade at the 4,500 mark, there has been a relentless decline in library use. Some argue fewer people visit libraries because the core service – book lending – has been badly run.

Many campaigners warn that councils are choosing to keep larger urban libraries but scrap local branches relied on by those unable to travel easily – the elderly, the poor, parents with young children. More than 300m book loans were made from public libraries last year, according to the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy, yet there are libraries under threat in every part of the country.

Doncaster is set to lose 14 of its 26 libraries, with poorer areas most affected, said Joyce Sheppard of the Save Doncaster Libraries campaign. “Doncaster is such a poor area, with low attainment in literacy, and these cuts matter,” she said.

In Somerset the council is proposing to close 20 out of 34 libraries. Conwy, north Wales, is aiming to close seven of 12. Croydon, south London, is to lose five. A day of action on 5 February will see “read-ins” at many of the threatened libraries in areas including Lewisham, south-east London, and North Yorkshire, with local authors joining readers, librarians and councillors to show support in quiet, family-friendly demonstrations. Others are planning flashmobs, YouTube videos, and picketing.

And indeed the previous Labour government weren’t adverse to indulging in library cuts and closures. But what has been highlighted is that currently libraries are under threat in every part of the country. Funnily enough, while Labour was pushing for cuts Tories made impassioned pleas to defend libraries. Yet once in power they too are trumpeting the need for savage cuts. So much for impassioned defences of public services.

Oh yes, this also brings in the Big Society Con with turbo-charged drive to privatise and cut. Starving libraries of funding (which has been happening over the years), flogging them off, involving the voluntary sector specifically volunteers, which in itself is a wholesale attack on terms and conditions, driving wages down, by deskilling work using untrained and unpaid labour.

In the spirit of the “big society”, local communities will be offered the chance to run them instead, but this would be an “absolute disaster”, according to children’s author and Oxfordshire resident Mary Hoffman. “Libraries need qualified librarians, and I don’t see volunteers rushing forward in some of the areas Oxfordshire has chosen to target. It’s vandalism.”

Where’s the accountability and transparency in this Big Society Con? How will these volunteers be chosen? These proposals have a real hideous nasty whiff nay stench of the Victorian. This is about precisely about privatising public services. Libraries  are a way to collectivise learning, finding out about the world, access to books, in an equal way. And when you look at how much of a budget is spent on libraries, well it is a drop in the financial ocean! Furthermore, at a time of recession and ferocious cuts, all these benefits are of greater importance. Good local libraries become more relevant to people’s needs, not less.

The cuts will have an immeasurable impact on learning. Libraries give equal access to education but the erosion due to cuts will create a society where the poor will not have the same access as people with money.

Netroots UK: there is more to activism than cyberspace…

Netroots UK will bring together hundreds of grassroots activists in central London for a day of workshops, discussions and networking activity.

1. Hear from innovative and effective campaigns in other fields.
2. Make useful contacts with key people and organisations.
3. Get practical training in digital techniques and technologies.
4. Take part in the debate on the future of UK activism.

Netroots UK is on this Saturday. Just look at the above,  what is meant by “key people”? Or “innovative and effective campaigns”…does that mean actual grassroots campaigning organisations on the ground fighting the cuts? What do you want to get out from the day? Who precisely is it bringing together a rag-tag of fink tanks, very soft lefts and TU bureaucrats. Not the engagement I’m looking for. What about innovative individuals fighting against closures of libraries, council services, playgroups, care facilities, attacks on benefits, jobs…and so on and so on. Looking at the whole programme for the day just definitely does not appeal to me. Why? Because it’s defunct of radicalism. It’s also makes me wonder what the organisers actually truly believe what activism is? An example, look at the keynote speakers, the day can be described as fink tanks and soft lefts tinged with Fabianism. There are some organisations/individuals I would be very interested in listening to such as False Economy, UK Uncut, Disabled People Against Cuts and around the student protests. But where are the grassroots activists who are involved in their own localities fighting the cuts, and where are the trade union activists fighting the cuts in their workplaces. Surely, it is more important to listen to ordinary people out there who are fighting the cuts in a dogged determination than to Polly Toynbee? What has the Toynbee got to offer other than confused Fabianism?

If this purports to be a day of networking with grassroots activists then I would prefer to make contact and show solidarity with actual, real activists on the ground fighting the cuts, not listening to fink tanks. A day like Netroots could actually bring anti-cuts activists, trade union activists, student activists, disability rights activists…anyone who is against these vicious cuts… could come together, network, swap ideas, stories, useful tips, dos and don’ts of organising, learning lessons…and so on. More fruitful, more pragmatic and it also brings together activists, geographical understanding of what’s happening in parts of the country. That would be my thing not listening to spineless TU bureaucrats who had consistently sold-out and betrayed workers (sorry Owen sometimes it has to be said). Do I want to listen to a load of bluster by Brendan Barber as by christ I have heard it once too often? Where are the rank and file TU activists on the panel who have been campaigning against the cuts? Shame and embarrass Barber in showing that resistance can be done, something which he should be at the forefront of but isn’t.

But what of the politics of this day? Soft left with a large dollop of Fabianism (with a smattering of Lib-Dems and Tories…so much for progressiveness and being left-wing). It’s useful to have an internet dynamic as that is becoming an integral part to organising (facebook, Twitter, blogging) but it is no substitute to, say, lobbying MPs (actually that would be more usual…how do you lobby your MP in the real world as opposed to online), organising meetings, literature, who to contact, leafleting, media involvement, local trade unions, trades councils, local Labour parties and so on. Bringing people together who may not have the luxury of online communication. Obviously, the internet can capture more activists instantly than previous methods of advertising but you still need to organise on the ground collectively, you still need those structures. You still need old style methods of organisation.  Also, will this be one day of talking and everyone goes home? What kind of netroots will be sown?

The trouble with the soft left is that there’s a tendency to talk left vote right as epitomised by Jon Cruddas (Compass backs this day too), along with other friendly bland middle class lacking-class-struggle-analysis orgs and individuals. And where are the MPs who have consistently fought against cuts consistently in Parliament and outside like John McDonnell, Jeremy Corbyn, Katy Clark….. ? Nowhere on any of the panels….

It looks like a corporate style  A-Z of cyber communication. But is that what activists, need and want? Cyber struggle and organisation has its important place. Personally, I’d prefer a DIY day of networking (don’t particularly like that word as it smacks corporate) with activists out in the real world fighting the realities of cuts.

NB: This is a comment I made at Simon’s blog on the same issue (excellent post too)

An elitist day mainly for self-serving careerists who want to boost their employment prospects, why would you want to listen to the clever conceited chatterati banging on about the bleeding obvious (“We are faced with cuts”…. Really? Who knew that… Blimey shocker of the week). Frankly, I want to hear ordinary rank and file trade unionists talking about fighting the cuts, students demonstrating newly active evolving political consciousness, anti-cuts campaigners, disability rights activists…. I don’t wanna hear Serco friendly Toynbee, Hari, bloody Tim “Tory” Montgomerie (I mean, c’mon why invite the class enemy along with a LibDem?). Oh, and Brendan Barber….shame he can’t spend the same amount of time he did  helping to organise this event at the forefront of workers’ resistance against the cuts, confronting the ConDems head on as opposed to the usual mealy-mouthed pathetic approach. He’s an embarrassment to the trade union movement!

Indeed people on the bottom 10% decile are more less likely to own a computer let alone have internet connection, while it is no surprise that the top 10% decile vast majority do. And who will be affected by the cuts the very people who can’t get access to activism on line, to be honest, would they want to? It doesn’t come across as inclusive and indeed looks very middle class. Campaigning against the cuts where poverty and deprivation exists it is really going to be difficult to reach out to them cyber-style. BTW I am not ant-cyberspace I mean I communicate through blogging, twittering and face book and it is an important tool, it has a place in organisation, for activism but it is no political substitute for real life activism.

Instead of putting on these Activism 2.0 events (Splintered Sunrise hit nail on the head), it is about engaging people based on inclusivity (libraries, one of many examples, are a place where people, who don’t own them, use computers but with closures and cuts that access will disappear ) and equality, reaching out to people who don’t have access or just don’t see the relevance of internet activism then you also need to resort to the usual “old fashion” means of organisation, all forms of engagement are vital you can’t substitute one for the other.

LRC Conference: Resist the Cuts, Rebuild the Party

As a supporter of the LRC and also an elected member of the National Committee I would like to advertise the AGM on the 15 January:

Saturday 15th January 2011
10:00am to 4:30pm

The LRC conference and AGM will take place at Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London, WC1 (Nearest tube Holborn). The conference will set LRC campaigning priorities for the year ahead, elect a new National Committee and officers and will hear from national and international speakers.

Confirmed speakers include: Tony Benn, Christine Blower (NUT), Katy Clark MP, Jeremy Corbyn MP, John McDonnell MP, Clare Solomon (ULU President), Matt Wrack (FBU)

More information can be found at the website here.

The Disappearance of Alice Creed

I watched the stylish intriguing modern film noir, The Disappearance of Alice Creed. It’s taut with a script with minimal dialogue. But that’s the beauty it gives the film edge and tension. There are only 3 actors in this film (the excellent Eddie Marsan who is so understated and underrated which is a real scandal as he deserves attention) that creates uneasy and volatile relationships along with twists and turns and double-crosses. Anyway, I really wanted to see this film when it was released in Spring of 2010 but it was only on a limited release in London, that annoyed me some what so as a consequence waited until the film came out on dvd. The setting, plot and superb acting creates a claustrophobic dynamic which further unnerves the viewer. Classic in the making and director J Blakeson is someone to watch out for.

This piece of music Cathy Davey’s Holy Moly is played through out the film. Wonderfully atmospheric.

A fistful of sequels and remakes

So it seems that 2011 will be the Hollywood year of remakes and sequels. Sequels can be good, Godfather II, Empire Strikes Back, Terminator 2,  Aliens 2. But more often than not they can be “oh my, just not like the first one”… especially when you get to 2, 2, 4, 5 6…… Thinking more of the shlock, horror and gore films which indeed do suck the life blood out of a franchise. And the sequels to the fantastic roller coaster of imagination The Matrix bored the life out of me with the spiritual and cod-philosophy. Another sequel set for 2014 is a third instalment of Kill Bill: Vol. 3. I look forward to that though I hope by then that Quentin Tarantino has a strict script editor who can take a scythe through the stodgy long winded dialogue (bring back Roger Avary!).

There are many films that are utterly sacrosanct “hands off this sparkly gem of  celluloid ingenuity”… But that doesn’t stop Hollywood who see a milch cow for exploiting, and where sometimes it backfires as audiences can see through it. The quality so lacking. As Mark Kermode said about the remake of the magnificent Let The Right One In, “Why would I want to ‘Let Me In’ when I have ‘Let The Right One In”….Indeed! I saw a trailer for Let Me In and it depressed the living daylights out of me as I wanted to shout, “Why do this”? And while we are on the subject why remake the scary iconic A Nightmare on Elm Street?

A couple of years ago when I saw a gem of a film, 13 Tzameti (French/Georgian), absolutely stunning, dramatic, and powerful. Simply made in monochrome but the story tells of desperation and anguish. I remember thinking that Hollywood would remake this film, sanitise it with precisely the Hollywood treatment… they did, it was called 13.

Cinema should be about showing an array of films of different genres and stories. Unfortunately, we live in a capitalist world where what sells is repeated, the ethos of “bums on seats”, along with cynical marketing and commodifying success… It is a case repeating ad nauseam. Then some film that breaks the mould slips into the cinema and gains success which treats the audience with intelligence and respect as opposed to considering us as drones who are addicted to chewing gum for the eye. I assume that variety is the spice to life, so I can sit happily and watch daft films that resurrect the Cold War but has great action scenes (Salt), cerebrally adventurous and fascinating (Inception), surreal off-the-wall yet thought-provoking (Dogtooth), specific historical periods that spotlight turbulent political eras (The Secret in Their Eyes and The Headless Woman), taut original narrative of modern film noir (The Disappearance of Alice Creed), along with the usual Hollywood fare of clichéd hackneyed nonsense (Knight and Day…. Ok, I saw it…guilty as charged!). But that’s the point people  like different things but there is an obsession with the movie industry with what sells we will just churn it out 10 fold. Boring rip-offs usually.

And the remakes and sequels continue; Shakespeare In Love 2, Bad Santa 2 and Rounders 2. Also there’s a remake of Brighton Rock which I will be fascinated to see as it stars Sam Riley (who, incidentally, appeared in 13) as Pinky Brown. Though in saying all this…… sometimes remakes are better than the original, Soderbergh’s Ocean’s Eleven was far far far more superior than the Rat Pack original (poor old Lewis Milestone who made All Quiet On The Western Front and the original Front Page). His version of Solaris is equal to Tarkovsky’s original.

Mentioning, Front Page there have been some wonderful remakes of this such as His Girl Friday full of wise cracking barbs and Rosalind Russell. To be honest, I always preferred Mann’s, L.A. Takedown than the Pacino/De Niro face off in Heat.

Other successful remakes include Nolan’s Insomnia from the ’97 Norwegian version. The Magnificent Seven from Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai. Scorsese’s The Departed from Wai Keung Lau & Siu Fai Mak’s Infernal Affairs. Also, Far From Heaven, Todd Haynes impressive remake of Douglas Sirk’s  All That Heaven Allows. Another Kurosawa original, Yojimbo, remade as a spaghetti western classic, Leone’s A Fistful of Dollars.

But with every success there are duds pure unadulterated pap such as the Coen brothers, The Lady Killers (can’t wait to see what they have done with True Grit), the Hollywood-ising = happy ending of the excellent creepy, Spoorloos to the dull awful, The Vanishing (poor old George Sluizer…he directed both).  Depressed I was when I stupidly watched the ’90s remake of Clouzot’s classic Les Diaboliques. And why, oh why, oh why why why WHY did Gus Van Sant think it necessary to remake Psycho. It was shockingly staggeringly… shite. And why did Haneke think necessary to make an English language version of Funny Games? Nothing much different stylistically or dialogue but the acting is better in the original and has the edge over the remake.

I think Philip French makes a pertinent point when he writes: Many American film-makers only go to see foreign movies, especially French comedies, as possible fodder for rapid transposition to the US. Given production costs and the public’s fondness for the familiar, it’s not surprising the temptation to rework successes is often irresistible.

Well, I will wait and see what 2011 brings cinematically….. Happy film viewing!!

Day out

Yesterday I visited the Tate Britain to see Muybridge exhibition and the Romantics. The powerful, inventive and dramatic photography through the sepia lens contrasted with the vibrant and spectacular colourful landscapes of Turner. In one of the main halls there was exhibited Fiona Banner’s startling yet breathtaking Harrier. Very magnificent. Also first time I noticed pollarded trees outside the Tate.