The Spectator

Spectator letters: Islamophobia, breast-feeding and Bach

Already a subscriber? Log in

This article is for subscribers only

Subscribe today to get 3 months' delivery of the magazine, as well as online and app access, for only £3.

  • Weekly delivery of the magazine
  • Unlimited access to our website and app
  • Enjoy Spectator newsletters and podcasts
  • Explore our online archive, going back to 1828

Sir: Having been shocked by the revelations in Douglas Murray’s article, and being conscious of the decline in the traditional meaning of British values, I feel bound to propose the following. Firstly, that the Muslim parents of children being subjected to education that inspires them to militancy should be enlisted to help prohibit such teachings and influence, as they are against the majority view of that generation. Secondly, that mixed religious schools with equal emphasis on Islam and Christianity should be monitored. And finally, that Muslims who come to this country for economic reasons or to escape medievalism should be aware of the fact that it is being reborn in the schools in their new country.
Peter Hutley
Bramley, Surrey

Bosom buddies

Sir: Susan Hill’s account of the difficulties many mothers experience when first trying to breast-feed will ring true for many women (‘Breast advice’, 14 June). As she says, what is needed is a body of willing volunteers who will be available to help struggling new mothers and their howling babies. There is such a body, the National Childbirth Trust (NCT), which trains volunteers to offer free one-to-one advice. The NCT also offers preparation for childbirth classes (usually not free) and the opportunity for mothers to form a social group. There are other organisations offering similar support. I’m from the same generation as Susan Hill and I also remember the breast-feeding storm troopers she describes. I don’t think you would encounter them now.
Gillian Healey
Pershore, Worcestershire

Russia and the EU

Sir: John O’Sullivan (‘Moscow’s Wizard of Oz’, 7 June) overlooks the elephant in the room. Why is Russia not welcome as a member of the European Union?

O’Sullivan sees Russia as somehow different and apart from all other countries in the European orbit. Further, he clearly believes the difference to be an unalterable given of the modern world. It is only because this gulf between Russia and the rest of Europe is fixed by assumption that his conference intellectuals can talk about ‘the Eurasian Union’, ‘the wider geopolitical struggle with the Anglo-Saxons’ and ‘the “geo-politicians” in Moscow who chill our blood’.

I am not a fan of the EU, but no one conjures up such a vast and malign role for any of its members. These members include Germany, Britain, France and Italy, all of which have larger national outputs than Russia, and in that sense could do just as much geopolitical mischief if they were so minded. If Russia were inside the EU, it seems likely that John O’Sullivan’s ruminations would become absurd.

The trouble is that the European Commission top brass do not want Russia in the EU. Nations’ vote shares in the Council of Ministers are determined by population, and Russia would therefore have more votes than Germany, France or any other country. The geopolitical purpose of the EU is the redemption of Germany from its past, and the reinstatement to great power roles of Germany and France. Russian membership of the EU would ruin that. So we are condemned to the tragedy of continued tension in Europe between the western states and Russia, even though Russia (with about 10 per cent of wider Europe’s output) is now so overshadowed economically that the notion of rivalry between it and the rest of Europe is ludicrous.
Tim Congdon
Huntley, Gloucestershire

In search of tedium

Sir: There is an echo of Theodore Adorno’s essay, ‘Bach defended against his devotees’ in Peter Phillips’s piece on Bach (Arts, 7 June). Adorno, a musicologist and analyst of ‘the authoritarian personality’, saw the early music movement, which contributed to Bach’s popularity, as an escape into an authoritarian world. Underlying both essays is a musician’s irritation that Bach appeals to fairly unmusical people. But as Malcolm Boyd said in his book on Bach: ‘What is astonishing, and in the end inexplicable, is that music which makes so few concessions to the listener should enjoy an immense popular following.’ Maybe we should all take Albert Einstein’s advice about Bach: ‘Listen, play, love, revere… and keep your mouth shut.’ In the meantime, perhaps Peter Phillips can tell us which Bach pieces are the work of a ‘tedious old windbag’. I don’t believe I have heard any of them yet.
Philip Stevens
London W12

Consolation in a glass

Sir: The first letter in the most recent Spectator dealt with religion, and the last with malt whisky. I couldn’t help recalling those lines of A.E. Housman in which he brought the two elements aptly together: ‘And malt does more than Milton can/

To justify God’s ways to man.’
Ronald Arnold
Eynsham, Oxfordshire

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in