HATECRAFT




Seriously? Maybe it’s just me.

I’m always a little suspicious of people who profess not to be offended by Lovecraft’s racism. Come on. This really doesn’t bother you? You can just overlook it?

I’ll never be able to. For one thing, I’ve seldom met a member of a minority who shared this tolerance. No, it’s pretty much a white thing and usually preceded by a complaint about “pretentious” snobs, you know, them with their fancy grammar and their punctuation. Loud factions within the genre are nothing if not anti-literary.

That’s part of it.

But… why aren’t more people offended? I just don’t get this. Why does old HPL get a free pass when it comes to hate speech? Is it because of the genius of his prose style?

“Cthulhu still lives, too, I suppose, again in that chasm of stone which has shielded him since the sun was young. His accursed city is sunken once more, for the Vigilant sailed over the spot after the April storm; but his ministers on earth still bellow and prance and slay around idol-capped monoliths in lonely places. He must have been trapped by the sinking whilst within his black abyss, or else the world would by now be screaming with fright and frenzy. Who knows the end? What has risen may sink, and what has sunk may rise. Loathsomeness waits and dreams in the deep, and decay spreads over the tottering cities of men. A time will come – but I must not and cannot think! Let me pray that, if I do not survive this manuscript, my executors may put caution before audacity and see that it meets no other eye.”

Does that passage truly inspire anyone to read further? Anyone who hasn’t sustained a cranial injury? Brought into contact with Lovecraft’s writing, even the most erudite scholars fairly gibber. Peter Damien’s recent comments on Book Riot (which nearly caused an actual riot) are not atypical: “A godawful writer. He was so bad. I really cannot stress this enough.” Nor was Edmund Wilson’s famous remark about HPL: “The only real horror in these fictions is the horror of bad taste.” Academics just can’t seem to believe that adults read this sort of thing. I have the same problem.

There must be some reason people support it, because support it they do. Rabidly. A few months ago, someone in the Literary Darkness group made a dismissive remark about Lovecraft and “casual racism.” Leaving aside (for the moment) that the phrase itself is appalling, does this sound casual to anyone?

“The only thing that makes life endurable where Blacks abound is the Jim Crow principle, and I wish they'd apply it in New York both to Niggers and to the more Asiatic types of puffy, ratfaced Jews!”

Or this?

“Of the complete biological inferiority of the negro there can be no question he has anatomical features consistently varying from those of other stocks, and always in the direction of the lower primates.”

Both examples are from HPL’s voluminous letters to editors. (He apparently wrote thousands of these, like some troll who never logged off.) And it’s not as though these attitudes did not bleed over into his fiction. They gushed.

“The negro had been knocked out, and moment’s examination shewed us that he would permanently remain so. He was a loathsome, gorilla-like thing, with abnormally long arms which I could not help calling fore legs, and a face that conjured up thoughts of unspeakable Congo secrets…”

What about this do people admire? And, please, don’t anyone start going on about his “ideas” again. Which inventions seem so brilliant? The giant elbow? The invisible whistling octopus?

In a recent New York Review of Books article, regarding “The New Annotated H.P. Lovecraft,” edited by Leslie S. Klinger, Charles Baxter raises several interesting points. This one in particular struck me: “Klinger notes that Lovecraft’s “support of Hitler’s eugenic programs, including the ‘racial cleansing’ advocated by Ernst Rüdin and others, is well known.” This reader had not known it but upon being informed was not particularly surprised.”

Nor was I. It seems very much in character.

The problem is not that HPL was a product of his time – an excuse I’m also sick of hearing – but that he was a vile product of his time. Sadly, that time seems not to have passed so much as cycled back. The Southern Poverty Law Center tracked nearly a thousand active hate groups in the US last year. Sorry, but I will never not mind. I will remain outraged and disgusted. And that but everybody was a racist back then argument is unpersuasive. Other writers of the period committed themselves to passionate anti-Fascism. Why does Horror continue to make a patron saint of this creep? I can’t help feeling he’s not just getting a pass. It’s almost as though Lovecraft’s bigotry somehow excuses his terrible writing, even justifies it.

I know many people agree: you should see all the private messages praising my courage. Not that I don’t appreciate the support, but come on already. My courage? In voicing an opinion? They have a point though, all these oh, you're so brave to say this out loud folks. To publicly express such sentiments is to antagonize the zealots, and they will come after you. This remains in many ways a cult, complete with an elaborately delusional belief system. For instance, accepted dogma holds that HPL eventually repudiated his fondness for the Nazis.

"By God, I like the boy!"
~ H.P. Lovecraft (about Adolf Hitler), November 1936

HPL died in March of 1937, just a few months after making that statement, so the spasm of sanity must have been brief, if it occurred at all, but pointing this out provokes the fanatics to renewed levels of frenzy, so be careful. These are the same people who claim that his lifelong demented hatefulness has no relevance to his "art." Why then do they insist on painting him as a reformed character? Logic is not the order of the day. Also beware of experts who hyperventilate over HPL's supposed literary merits. Such individuals have an agenda.

Not convinced about the political connection? Check out some of the people who become incensed over any criticism of their idol. Any moment now, comments are sure to start piling up. Just wait. Look at who their other favorite authors are. How shocked will you be? Oh, and don’t forget to check out the list of books they hate as well.

Try to act surprised.

Trust me, it only gets uglier. Fan culture can be deeply reactionary, and the genre has catered to this particular contingent for a very long time. No, I’m sticking with the disgust. Plus there’s that aspect where this is all just so fucking embarrassing. Horror writers often complain about the lack of respect accorded us by the rest of the literary community. Ever think maybe there’s a reason? Or that it might be time for Horror to grow up?

Shudder.

"Of course they can’t let niggers use the beach at a Southern resort – can you imagine sensitive persons bathing near a pack of greasy chimpanzees?" ~ HPL

Any questions?

* * * * *

Martin Luther King Jr. Day (and the recent epidemic of racist violence) prompted me to post this blog. It seems fitting to conclude with this quote.

“In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


Notes & Links:

For more information, see this article by Charles Baxter in the New York Review of Books:
"Racism is not incidental to Lovecraft’s vision but is persistent and essential to it."
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archi...

The New Annotated H.P. Lovecraft by H.P. Lovecraft




And don't overlook this essay by Laura Miller in Salon:
"His venomous racism is self-evident; it’s right there on the page."
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/11/its_o...

An "in-defense-of" article by Samuel Goldman appears in (where else?) The American Conservative:
"To criticize his stilted dialogue or Gothic affectations is to miss the point."
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...

Also Phenderson Djeli Clark's article – THE ‘N’ WORD THROUGH THE AGES – at Racialicious should not be missed:
"It’s always perplexing to watch the gymnastics of mental obfuscation that occur as fans of Lovecraft attempt to rationalize his racism."
http://www.racialicious.com/2014/05/2...

Daniel José Older's passionate and insightful piece in The Guardian constitutes required reading:
"The fantasy community cannot embrace its growing fanbase of color with one hand while deifying a writer who happily advocated for our extermination with the other."
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014...

Readers might also enjoy taking this quiz.
Who said it? Hitler or Lovecraft?
http://www.beesgo.biz/horp.html
Some of the answers may surprise you.

This bit is from CREATING A DISTURBANCE, my article about the reactionary forces still so prevalent within the genre. It’s in the current issue of Primeval, a Journal of the Uncanny.

“Everything is political, every aspect of life, and all forms of dissent begin in misery. No individual secure within a free society ever hurled a brick at a tank. Only the oppressed know this kind of rage. There are many ways to resist, large ones and small ones, and even reading can be an act of rebellion. The immersion of the self in forbidden thought manifests a quiet defiance. Often, this constitutes the first step… and a dangerously liberating one. On a basic level, horror fiction suggests an exploration of the unknown, but other impulses often dominate, among them a regressive factor apparently built into the foundation of the genre, an aspect grounded in both fear of the unfamiliar and hysterical loathing of difference.”
http://www.amazon.com/Primeval-Journa...

Primeval A Journal of the Uncanny (Primeval #2) by Livia Llewellyn





And this is from my introduction to Enter at Your Own Risk: Fires and Phantoms, a queer-themed anthology of horror stories from Firbolg Publishing.

“There existed a whole universe of such material hidden in plain sight upon the dustiest of library shelves. Edith Wharton’s ghost stories, for instance, fairly vibrated with sexual tensions, even when all the characters were men. As a child, I devoured it all, impressing the hell out of the local librarian and quickly learning to eschew more obvious fare, like H.P. Lovecraft’s luridly paranoid ravings. After all, I empathized only too strongly with the “other” that so terrified him. Plus his prose style always seemed more suggestive of mental illness than artistry.”
http://www.amazon.com/Enter-Your-Own-...

Enter At Your Own Risk Fires and Phantoms by Alex Scully
18 likes ·   •  337 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on January 19, 2015 11:59 Tags: lovecraft, racism
Comments Showing 51-100 of 337 (337 new)    post a comment »

message 51: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd ... ah, but I'd have to walk into his dark brown dusty house, and look into that face... no thank-you. Wouldn't have gone into Roald Dahl's writing shed either.


message 52: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd mind you, E, T.S. Elliot has a bit to answer for himself, him and Ezra between them..


message 53: by E (new)

E What do you mean?
By the way,call me Ehsan


message 54: by Michael DiBaggio (new)

Michael DiBaggio @Rebecca: Nothing in what I wrote attributes such views to you. In my original comment, I was not even replying to you, but the original post.


message 55: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd Ehsan, a good book to read, and very enjoyable about Eliot is 'Painted Shadow' A Life of Vivienne Eliot,' by Carole Seymour-Jones.


message 56: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd Sorry, Michael, I've lost the plot now, forgotten whatever it was... New day. Have a good one!


message 57: by E (new)

E thanks for the suggestion Rebecca, but What do you think He hated Elliot and those remarkable writers so much??


message 58: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd don't know, Ehsan, I hadn't heard that about him, but writers sometimes hate other writers who are more successful than they are. Where did you read that anyway?


message 59: by E (new)

E two books Mentioned his great disdain toward these writers:Lovecraft and a World in Transition: Collected Essays on H. P. Lovecraft and Literary articles of HPL,both by S.T.Joshi.
He believed Winsberg ohio,by Sherwood Anderson is a very bad story and T.S.Elliot is a bad poet.He said Wasteland is meaningless and Wrote a famous poem called WASTEPAPERS in which he mocked Elliot for wasteland
Rebecca and Rob, I am actually in a tough spot and am in a great state of doubt


message 60: by Gerhard (new)

Gerhard Rebecca wrote: "... I must remember to order a copy of Mein Kampf then. :-)"

You missed my point entirely. Once we start 'selecting' the types of books we read based on an author's perceived views / lifestyle / beliefs -- that is high-minded, because by what criteria does that make you the moral / aesthetic high majority?


message 61: by Gerhard (new)

Gerhard Rebecca wrote: "... I must remember to order a copy of Mein Kampf then. :-)"

Please do. The road to evil is paved with good intentions, as many a sage has pointed out. We cannot exclude books based on an author's lifestyle or perceived views. The work has to be separate.


message 62: by Gerhard (new)

Gerhard Rebecca wrote: "... and therefore nor did Gerhard. Why not? My point was infinitely more subtle."

Subtle?


message 63: by Rebecca (last edited Feb 27, 2015 02:50AM) (new)

Rebecca Lloyd Gerhard, I don't think I have ever selected books in that way. Have you? That isn't what happens is it? You come across an author, you might read the work and then like it or not like it, you might read about them and find them interesting, uninteresting or downright nasty, and you might tend to move away from certain authors if nastiness is very deeply embedded in their behaviours and views. What I've just written there as a description is a great deal more subtle than the idea of first 'examining' an author's life before deciding whether or not to read him. So, however much you offer me that cloak to wear, I ain't wearing it. Sorry. That is not how I behave. I have to say though that if I were to find out that a writer that I loved was a hideous individual it would be quite hard to stop reading the work. But in a situation where the person is also a bad writer, it's extremely easy to turn away from them. You say the work has to be separate. No. The work has to be separate for you, not for me, and we can both exist alongside each other in peace, can't we? Lol.


message 64: by E (new)

E Rebecca wrote: "ha-ha, maybe he'd even sign it for me, Robert."
I bet he would


message 65: by E (new)

E Gerhard wrote: "E wrote: "yeah. you are certainly right about Robert and the discussion we are having my dear Gerhard. I am not saying that Rob is wrong,he IS right. but,IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, you just can not dest..."

I am thinking more and more about this everyday


message 66: by E (new)

E Gerhard wrote: "E wrote: "OK. sorry.I did not mean to be aggressive or rude.I just got angry for a sec. I said, Rob is a precious friend and I respect his opinion, even though I, to some extent, do not approve it...."

He really is.A great one of course.


message 67: by Gerhard (last edited Feb 27, 2015 02:28PM) (new)

Gerhard Rebecca wrote: "Gerhard, I don't think I have ever selected books in that way. Have you? That isn't what happens is it?"

Sadly, it does happen: from The Satanic Verses to The Girls of Riyadh. Check out www.bannedbooks.org and www.ala.org.

The below is quite interesting:

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/02/25/...


message 68: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd I had a quick look at the last link and there was the big man looking rather like a ferret. Not any ferret I've been friends with though! Lol.


message 69: by Gerhard (new)

Gerhard One of the first times I went to Kinokoniya at Dubai Mall, a bookstore so massive they hand out maps, I bumped into an entire display of Adolf Hitler books, including Mein Kampf in all its glory. I was unsure if I was more fascinated or appalled, as I think it remains banned in South Africa (for its potential to incite 'hate speech'). Also, when I was back-packing in Israel, this was during Gulf War I, I found a hardcover copy of The Satanic Verses in a bookshop in Tel Aviv, which I smuggled back to South Africa (at that time it was banned here as well). At uni in Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, I remember having to read The Communist Manifesto in the Special Collections section of the library (it was not banned, but was treated as a dangerous weapon). So I think if one comes from a culture / mindset that often tries to ban / repress ideas and books, one develops an affinity for the marginal.

And for ferrets.


message 70: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd yes, I suppose you must 'develop an affinity for the marginal' but also maybe, if it's okay to say, perhaps your twitchiness is more developed than mine... Does that make sense? Probably not. I suppose what I mean is that I might have a more... well anyway, I can see where our differences might lie. As for ferrets, Lol. I love them. I had one once, and I adored him. Ankle biting little bastard.


message 71: by E (new)

E Guys,Have you seen Joshi response?
Rob have you seen it?
He is really pissed
http://stjoshi.org/news.html


message 72: by Gerhard (new)

Gerhard Rebecca wrote: "yes, I suppose you must 'develop an affinity for the marginal' but also maybe, if it's okay to say, perhaps your twitchiness is more developed than mine... Does that make sense? Probably not. I sup..."

Does make sense; sometimes difficult to modulate tone online. Book I'm reading now the guy has a pet turtle called Deckard (after Harrison Ford's character in Blade Runner) to which he feeds live earthworms. Yech.


message 73: by Gerhard (new)

Gerhard E wrote: "Guys,Have you seen Joshi response?
Rob have you seen it?
He is really pissed
http://stjoshi.org/news.html"


Talk about shooting yourself in the foot with a bazooka:

Well, as a matter of fact, my own judgment (derived from reading a fair amount of the great literature in English, Latin, Greek, French, German, and other languages) is that this is not merely good prose; it is superb prose. I am getting to the point of thinking that anyone who doesn’t think Lovecraft a fine prose writer is simply an ignoramus — someone who simply doesn’t know anything about prose. It is as if you’ve put a dunce cap on your head and said to the world, “I don’t know the first thing about good writing.”


message 74: by E (new)

E what do you mean,man?


message 75: by Robert (last edited Mar 22, 2015 09:01AM) (new)

Robert Dunbar Yes, pretty funny. The great Lovecraftian scholar -- all bent out of shape over my opinion. Hey, I don't even have a Wikipedia entry. Obviously, I'm an "ignoramus."

This is what I meant about bashing.


message 76: by E (new)

E Robert wrote: "Yes, pretty funny. The great Lovecraftian scholar -- all bent out of shape over my opinion. Hey, I don't even have a Wikipedia entry. Obviously, I'm an ignoramus."
LOL....


message 77: by Robert (last edited Mar 22, 2015 09:02AM) (new)

Robert Dunbar Dont overlook Laura Miller's SALON article, mentioned above. I think it provides a little perspective.

http://www.salon.com/2014/09/11/its_o...

"Perhaps the most egregious response to the WFA petition has come from the prominent scholar and Lovecraft biographer S.T. Joshi, who posted several responses to Older’s campaign on his blog. A remarkable combination of the pompous and the grotesquely arch, these salvos have the unconvincing hauteur of someone who wishes to appear wittily above the fray when in fact he is angry and not about to drop it any time soon. (“I suppose the poor fellow is unaccustomed to intellectual debate. It is true that my response may have been the equivalent of swatting a fly with a sledgehammer — but it was the principle of the thing, you see,” etc.)"


message 78: by Rebecca (last edited Feb 28, 2015 01:11PM) (new)

Rebecca Lloyd oh, how fascinating, a bit of drama enters the picture. I like that he's an atheist, I like his cats, I suspect I might be better at the English language and its nuances than he...Thank you E, for alerting me to him, and I repeat here what I said earlier, I couldn't give a monkeys who gets angry with my opinion or not. May my own dunce cap be white, and can it have three black pom-poms in a line upon it, and may my face be deadly white, my lips deadly red, and my eyes hauntingly childish.


message 79: by E (new)

E Gerhard wrote: "E wrote: "Guys,Have you seen Joshi response?
Rob have you seen it?
He is really pissed
http://stjoshi.org/news.html"

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot with a bazooka:

Well, as a matter of ..."

what do you mean,man?


message 80: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd oh, but this suddenly now could become cruel, and I can't do that. The man, whoever he is has somehow staked his reputation on this writer and, and as far as I'm concerned HP is mere sauce. So I don't want to be involved in anything that puts HP's devotees down. Unless that is, this Joshi geezer is kind of interfering with what's happening over here, then I'd have to come into the frame again and squash him .... badly.


message 81: by Wilum (new)

Wilum Pugmire The ignorance of this thread, and the comments, is very sad indeed. The absurd notion that Lovecraft was a bad writer is utterly moronic. Happily, S. T. Joshi has answered this blog in-depth, and with great wisdom, at www.stjoshi.org/news.html


message 82: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd Actually all HP was writing about was how he felt about himself.


message 83: by E (new)

E Rebecca wrote: "oh, how fascinating, a bit of drama enters the picture. I like that he's an atheist, I like his cats, I suspect I might be better at the English language and its nuances than he...Thank you E, for ..."
Are you an atheist??


message 84: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd is it not wonderful that HP's bulldog is the exact kind of man that the racist writer would've hated.


message 85: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd of course I'm an atheist, what else can I be?


message 86: by E (new)

E I did not know that.Why are you an atheist?


message 87: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd Hi Wilum, I shouldn't really be engaged in all of this shite, since I couldn't really give a damn about the man, but can I please have my moron suit, and can it be pink with fluffy bits and dead flies on it and I'll wear it with pride. In your dreams, mate.


message 88: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd oh, and actually language matters, so '... and the comments, is very sad indeed' should be 'and the comments are...'


message 89: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd What on earth do you mean,Ehsan? What else is there to be in 2015? Give me a break here.


message 90: by E (new)

E OK.Relax.


message 91: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd I am sure there are people looking at these comments and smiling. Hope you all have beautiful sleep and slippy-slidey dreams. [sp?]


message 92: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd thank you Ehsan... Lol, I am utterly relaxed, thank you for thinking of me...


message 93: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd this is really quite a wild and good conversation, I shall smile in thinking about it. I'm slightly horrified, but fascinated as well to have become aware of the 'cult' of the silly man and understood how fiercely his something or other is guarded by 'others' years after the slip of a man died. Heck.


message 94: by Robert (last edited Mar 22, 2015 09:03AM) (new)

Robert Dunbar Rebecca wrote: "oh, but this suddenly now could become cruel, and I can't do that. The man, whoever he is has somehow staked his reputation on this writer and, and as far as I'm concerned HP is mere sauce. So I do..."

True. The Big Man has – as they say – a dog in this fight. “Dunbar must think he’s a better writer than Lovecraft.” Seriously? He needs to take the discussion down to that level right away? And to heap on the personal abuse so pompously? Such bombast seems intended to silence dissenting voices, and it’s likely it has accomplished this goal for many decades. But does his tone of frustrated malice suggest that it might not be working quite so well these days?

I find this encouraging.


message 95: by Robert (last edited Mar 22, 2015 10:48AM) (new)

Robert Dunbar Rebecca wrote: "Hi Wilum, I shouldn't really be engaged in all of this shite, since I couldn't really give a damn about the man, but can I please have my moron suit, and can it be pink with fluffy bits and dead flies on it and I'll wear it with pride. In your dreams, mate..."

I have not been monitoring these comments (as I think I made my points in the actual blog), but I would like to suggest we speak to each other a bit more courteously. "Wilum" is the respected author W.H. Pugmire, author of THE FUNGAL STAIN, whose work is often described as Lovecraftian. By criticizing HPL, I expect I seemed to be attacking his religion. Sorry to have given offense. Please visit the site below for information about his work.
http://sesqua.net/




message 96: by Tom (new)

Tom Mathews Michael wrote: "My point, if I may be glib about it, is that life is too short to only read people with whom I know ahead of time that I agree with in their personal views."

Choosing not to limit one's reading to just those you agree with is not the same as choosing not to read those you disagree with. As you say, life is short and there is plenty of reading material out there that doesn't fall into either category.


message 97: by Tom (last edited Mar 01, 2015 06:34AM) (new)

Tom Mathews Robert wrote: "I have not been monitoring these comments (as I think I made my points in the actual blog), but I would like to suggest we speak to each other a bit more courteously. "Wilum" is the respected author W.H. Pugmire, whose work is often described as Lovecraftian. By criticizing HPL I expect I seemed to be attacking his religion. Sorry to have given offense. Please visit the site below for information about his work. "

You are more of a gentleman than I am, Robert. Anyone who makes a blanket statement such as "anyone who doesn’t think Lovecraft a fine prose writer is simply an ignoramus" and then proceeds to present all sorts of logical fallacies in his very personal attack on you will get no love from me.

To be honest, I wouldn't make a very good judge of HPL's writing skill as each time I have started to read the example presented by both you and Mr. Joshi my eyes tended to roll up in my head and I ended up jumping to the next paragraph. Personally, I am of the opinion that any 20th century author who uses the word whilst is probably too enamored with the sight of his own words than is good for him. In his defense, while I have always struggled to stay engaged while reading his prose, I am fascinated with the fantastical worlds that he created. I honestly think that if it wasn't for his imagination, he would have long ago sunken into the chasm along with his unholy creation and even unholier opinions.


message 98: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Lloyd yes, I was a little rough last night with Wilum and Joshi and my language was not moderate. I apologise happily this morning to you both, but does the apology of an ignoramus count, I wonder?


message 99: by Gerhard (last edited Mar 01, 2015 08:47AM) (new)

Gerhard Rebecca wrote: "Actually all HP was writing about was how he felt about himself."

That's a pretty sweeping, and damning, statement.

The sort of thing that Mr. Joshi himself would spout.

Whatever his faults, as a man and a prose stylist, Lovecraft was very much the product of a social context, both cultural and political.

Please note I am not condoning the man's racist views, or his writing, which is probably as execrable as that of Hugo Gernsback, the 'founder' of SF, but simply pointing out that hindsight, after all, is a luxury.

And Lovecraft does have literary significance, despite modern reassessment of that status. (Which is a totally separate issue from his technical competence).

How will we be judged by future generations, I wonder?


message 100: by Gerhard (new)

Gerhard Rebecca wrote: "yes, I was a little rough last night with Wilum and Joshi and my language was not moderate. I apologise happily this morning to you both, but does the apology of an ignoramus count, I wonder?"

No. But I am happy to confer that Mr Joshi is indeed an idiot, in the considered opinion of this ignoramus.


back to top