Noppon Brothers, mascots

The Noppon Brothers are the mascots of Tokyo's landmark Tokyo Tower. I interviewed them in November 2006 by email. My questions were translated into Japanese and their answers were translated into English. The whole thing was edited to make it look like they had been interviewed face-to-face. YNB is the younger Noppon brother (red) and ONB is the older one (blue).

CBL: What is your job?

YNB: We are the Tokyo Tower mascots. Our duties are to let as many people as possible know that Tokyo Tower is a fun and nice place.

CBL: Is it true you are both twins?

YNB: Yes, that is true.

CBL: So, apart from wearing different colored clothes, is there any other way of telling you apart?

YNB: As you can see, my older brother has a band aid on his forehead.

CBL: You both seem very tall. How tall are you exactly?

YNB: We are 2 meters and 23 centimeters.

CBL: How old are you?

YNB: We are 10 years old.

CBL: Isn’t that a little young to be working full-time as a mascot for Tokyo Tower?

ONB: It has nothing to do with the age. The heart is the most important.

CBL: Do you go to school?

ONB: Tokyo Tower is like a school. We learn many things from the visitors every day.

CBL: You both seem to have a very odd shape. Is this an entirely natural shape or is it the result of plastic surgery?　

ONB: Are you kidding? Of course this is natural. How could this be plastic surgery?

CBL: How can I get to look as cool as you?

ONB: Coolness is in the heart, not how you look. The feeling of caring about others is important.

CBL: What is your favorite attraction in Tokyo Tower?

YNB: I like the glass floor on the 1st floor of the observation deck. Every time I look down my knees shake.

CBL: What is the greatest thing about Tokyo Tower?

YNB: From the opening 48 years ago to this day, Tokyo Tower has been the tallest free-standing iron building. Also, as of this year, September 29, the number of visitors reached 150 million, which means, since the entire Japanese population is about 120 million, almost everybody has visited Tokyo Tower at least once.

CBL: What will the Noppon brothers be doing this Xmas season?

YNB: Taking commemorative pictures around the Christmas tree and welcoming visitors by shaking their hands.

Read more...>>>

John Bean, politician

In 2012, over a period of several weeks, I interviewed veteran British nationalist John Bean by email. Mr. Bean, who was aged 85 at the time, spoke about a lengthy career in politics and activism, stretching from the late 1940s to the present. He also recounted his experiences and impressions of a number of well known figures on the nationalist side of politics, including Sir Oswald Mosley, A.K. Chesterton, Enoch Powell, John Tyndall and Nick Griffin.

CBL: First of all, I read your biographical memoir, Many Shades of Black. That was a fascinating account of political struggle from a very human perspective. However, to my mind, there seemed to be a bit of a gap between your fascinating description of life in post-Independence India, where you briefly worked in the chemical industry, and your active involvement in the Union Movement, following your return to the UK. What was the deciding moment or chain of events that turned you onto a nationalist course of action?

JB: The few months I worked in India in 1950 played a major part in fashioning the mould in which my life-long socio-political views were to be cast. The rather insular young nationalist who had eagerly volunteered for RAF aircrew in March 1945 found that his nationalism had widened to a European nationalism. However, the beginning of this metamorphosis began when serving in the Royal Navy on a former German ship, the Nordmark, in 1947-48. Its wartime function was to supply surface raiders and occasional U-boats and carry Merchant Navy survivors of British ships that had been sunk to internment in Germany. Two of these former prisoners had been contacted by the Royal Naval authorities and came to Portsmouth and spoke of their experiences on board as prisoners. They said that conditions were cramped and although the food was poor it was the same as served to the German crew. Above all they were treated correctly as prisoners of war. For the first time I began to question the image that wartime propaganda had given our recent enemy.

Arriving in India, as a nationalist I was interested to hear the opinions of so many older Indians who wished the British Raj was back, and praised its incorruptibility. In spite of its presence for some 250 years, I found the average Indian did not differentiate between a Briton, Frenchman, Swiss or German: we were all Europeans, all white men to them. Perhaps more important, I was soon conscious of the fact that I was in the presence of a deep-seated culture, but only as an observer and that for reasons I could not then define I would always be an observer, never to be enjoined within that culture. In contrast to the outward looking cultural ethic of the European, ever looking to cross previously defined frontiers, that of India to me at the time appeared as inward looking, each concentrating on his own soul personified by the navel contemplation of Buddha.

On reflection perhaps I was being too simplistic. Not taken into account was the fact that there are greater racial differences between, for example, The Brahmins and the Negritto type Dravidians of southern India than the Norwegians and Sicilians of Europe. Before I am taken to task for confusing the Indian caste system with race let it be remembered that 'caste' is of Sanskrit origin and just means 'colour.' It was devised by the Aryan invaders from the Caucasus who founded the Indus Valley civilisation around 1500 BC, who the Brahmins still associate themselves with. Returning to India 40 years later I found that my earlier interpretation of the reasons for the cultural differences between the European and the Indian still had some substance – particularly in rural areas – but, sadly, was becoming considerably affected by the materialistic aspects of Western culture.

CBL: Much of the political activity of Union Movement involved rowdy meetings with heckling, provocative marches, and brawls. This can of course be dated back to the British Union of Fascists versus hard left politics of the pre-War period, with a similar style of street politics continuing up to the National Front in the 1970s. In Many Shades of Black, this ‘aggro-politics’ often seems to coincide with ethnic tensions in working class neighbourhoods – Irish, Jewish, Black vs. English. In retrospect such violence seems to have contributed to the marginalization of British Nationalism and to have been a major tactical error. Were there any benefits from this kind of aggro-politics? Given the roughness of the areas Union Movement and subsequent nationalists operated in, how avoidable was such an element?

JB: On my return from India the first few months were occupied with obtaining a new job (still in the paint and resin industry) and establishing a home for our impending start of a family. As a reaction to the stories I had heard in the Navy about the generally civilised behaviour of German sailors during the war, when on leave in early 1948 I had obtained a copy of Oswald Mosley's Greater Britain from New Cross public library. Although impressed with much of its content I did nothing about it at the time. In 1950, four months after my return from India, I contacted the Mosley movement, basically for an update on Mosley's post-war view. His British Union of Fascists had been disbanded to be replaced by Union Movement. This had gone beyond narrow nationalism to 'Europe a Nation.' Although then, as today, I thought that a single European government was a step too far, my cultural experiences in Trinidad and more so in India, made the European idea in post-war Mosleyism more acceptable to my own ideas. I joined Union Movement in the late summer. In the autumn for the first time I heard Mosley speak at a meeting held in Kensington Town Hall. Although he had turned 60 he was still a first class orator and held the majority of his 500 audience spellbound. The meeting was held in peace with not even a heckler.

Jeffery Hamm's League of ex-Servicemen held meetings – mainly but not exclusively in London – from early 1947 until Mosley's Union Movement was formed late in 1948. Supported by mainly British Fascists, it continued to attract the same pre-war violent confrontations from the Communists and militant Jews. The militant Jewish group was now called the 43 Group (formed in 1943) with the express purpose of rooting out and destroying any Fascist or anti-Semitic elements that reared their heads following the release of Mosley and his support from 18b internment – without charge or trial.

Towards the end of 1949, however, the Communist Party must have received instructions from Moscow that Fascism in Britain no longer posed a major threat to 'democracy,' because the organised opposition practically ceased overnight. The pitched battles that were fought in Ridley Road, East London, where no holds were barred by Jew or Gentile, came to a halt. Now this was not good for Mosley's Union Movement as the publicity that had been created was turned off. It had been a vital tool in attracting not only some of his pre-war supporters, but their sons and daughters in the brave new world of London's East End at that time. Inspired by Alf Flockhart and Jeffery Hamm, but not directly by Mosley, attacks were initiated against Communists in their stronger areas and against the many Communist controlled 'Peace Movements' with a return of publicity as initiators of violence

I supported it and indulged in it to some extent, but it was a fatal mistake. It was repeated by John Tyndall 20 years later with the National Front marches that initially attracted more members, but the attraction of Left wing violence meant that the National Front carried the blame for the violence. Thus the NF carried on the same theme as Union Movement of marching its way into obscurity.

CBL: Would it be fair to say that British politics has always had a 'physical' side? One thinks of the 18th and 19th century political mobs, the typical unruliness of the hustings, often fuelled by free alcohol provided by candidates, as well as our great tradition of forceful heckling.

JB: This is true, although it tends to be overlooked by establishment media commentators of today. My experience of the 'physical' side of political campaigns in both Union Movement and the first BNP (1960-68) showed that some who had fought the fiercest drank the least in the pub meetings that usually followed an ‘encounter.’

CBL: You were involved in a fair number of brawls and tussles, often due to attacks from Leftists. You describe these in great detail in Many Shades of Black. Without advocating violence, what practical advice would you pass on to nationalists who find themselves in similar physically threatening situations?

JB: Unless you outnumber your militant opponents don't trail your cloak to encourage violence. If you are still in charge of speaker equipment that can overcome opposition chanting then hand over to those who can sometimes control the gathering by humour (which I tried at my Southall election meetings with some success) and not to those who prefer to 'wind up' your opponents.

CBL: Would it be fair to say that overall the Leftists with their superior numbers, covert support from the establishment, and greater ruthlessness came out on top in the street fighting?

JB: Hopefully without sounding like a bragging football hooligan, I do not recall the militant leftists coming out on top when their numbers were evenly matched. As for ruthlessness, I never met anyone more ruthless than Alf Flockhart of Union Movement – who I did not like – or my own 'bodyguard' in the early BNP – who I did like because his ruthlessness was controlled.

CBL: I get the impression from your book that you deeply regret nationalist politics having taken this course. How much of a dead-end do you think it has been? When did you come to this realization?

JB: It should be noted that the League of Empire Loyalists, led by A.K.Chesterton, never indulged in any violent actions to gain publicity. They preferred well thought out stunts to gain publicity. These included hiding under the stage at Tory meetings then commandeering the microphone to condemn their betrayal of the Empire, or having one of their members dress up as Archbishop Makarios and gaining access to the 1956 Commonwealth Conference. Several LEL demonstrators were subjected to violence, usually form outraged Conservative meeting stewards. It was, of course, all rather pointless because the electorate had noted that history had already decided that there was no longer any British Empire to be loyal to.

CBL: Supposing violent street politics had been avoided, do you think the British nationalist movement would have been able to avoid political marginalization and be in a much healthier position today, or would other factors have ensured its marginalization anyway?

JB: One only has to look at the reasonable progress being shown by Marine Le Pen with the Front National in France to see that if British nationalism had been able to distance itself from violence over the last 30 years or more then it would be more of a threat to the Lib-Lab-Con political establishment. But the latter's control of the media would probably still have prevented substantial nationalist Parliamentary representation today.

CBL: One of the most fascinating excerpts in your book Many Shades of Black is when you describe your face-to-face meeting with Sir Oswald Mosley. The two of you failed to see eye-to-eye, and he comes across as rather imperious. Apart from what you mention in the book, what do you remember about that meeting and what other impressions did you have of the man?

JB: On reflection my tea-time meeting with Mosley at the Eccleston Hotel gave classic examples of the duality of his character. In the preliminary discussion, which centred on my support for European co-operation and even a confederation, he listened attentively to my argument, courteously making non-committal acknowledgements although without entering into any debate. It was when I said that due to his past actions and positions, such as anti-Semitism, and the way he had been woefully misrepresented in the media on so many issues, he had no chance of being elected to any form of power, that he became irritated and changed to the imperious Mosley. Additionally, I had the impression that for him this was a another case of déjà vu where he, an aging man whose contemporary critics admitted could have been prime minister, was being told where he had gone wrong by a political tyro. Immediately after the meeting, in some ways, I regretted this additional disappointment I had given him.

CBL: If he had ever achieved power, how do you think he would have used it? Would he have been the monster that leftists and liberals assume? What about his anti-Semitism? Was it only opportunistic or did it run deeper?

JB: Leftists and liberals are notoriously victims of their own propaganda. Mosley in power would not have been a monster, although as a man of decision he would appear to the liberal-left as being somewhat dictatorial. If you read his Greater Britain, for his pre-war BUF policies, or The Alternative for his post-war Europe a Nation [ideas], it is corporatism in general that he was advocating and not 'Fascism' in its pejorative sense – certainly not in his post-war writings and speeches. Writing in his autobiography, My Life, page 287, this is his post-war reflection on fascism:

"Fascism was in essence a national creed, and therefore by definition took an entirely different form in different countries. In origin, it was an explosion against intolerable conditions, against remedial wrongs which the old world had failed to remedy. It was a movement to secure national renaissance by people who felt themselves threatened with decline into decadence and death and were determined to live and live greatly. Without understanding these three basic facts it is possible to abuse fascism, but not to make a serious reply to its case and its spirit.”

There is no escaping his anti-Semitism in his BUF days, although it could be understood why he became so. When Mosley left the Labour Party in 1931 to form the New Party he had the support of a number of Jewish members – much as Mussolini did in the early days of power in Fascist Italy. As the BUF progressed it came under vicious attacks at its meetings by Communists. In London, Leeds and Manchester in particular, many of these Communist militants were Jewish. This was not unusual but reflected the same political situation on the Continent. With Hitler's rise to power in 1933 his actions meant that he had virtually declared war on the Jewish people. It is therefore understandable that Jewish money and its reflected power in the media should be harnessed with the militancy of the communists to not only bring down Hitler and his National Socialism, which Fascism had morphed into, but also any party that expressed sympathy towards any aspect of his policies. This included the BUF. Hitler's intransigence meant that there was no turning back, that war was inevitable, and that Mosley's BUF could not survive.

CBL: I also got the impression from your account that he was rather disconnected from the day-to-day realities, although you don't specifically say this. I believe you also mention that he was spending much of his time out of the UK, in Ireland and France, at that time. And, of course, by background, he was from an upper class family. One of the failings of British nationalism, as I see it, was that at its core it lacked the plebeian touch and tended to rely for leadership on rather aloof scions of the old ruling class, or people from the lower classes who copied the attitudes of the old ruling class. I am thinking here of Enoch Powell and John Tyndall, who whatever their merits, also came across as pompous and distant. An interesting contrast can be drawn with the success of the SNP. Although a civic nationalist party, it has enjoyed great success because its leadership has always been rooted in the common Scottish people. Alex Salmond typifies this. Whatever negatives, he is indisputably one of 'The People.' Do you think that British nationalism was to a certain extent hamstrung by the influence of the class system and undue deference to those who had or who affected the manners of the old ruling class? How does Griffin fit into this picture? In my opinion, he’s more of an NCO type than an officer type, which should have been an asset in some ways.

Bean: In my opinion the only one of the people you referred to who was rather 'pompous' was John Tyndall. The stiff upper lip appearance of the Leader was everything to him. Perhaps it was his middle class origins, with strong connections to the Protestant church that made him so. He and I always had respect for each other, but he could never understand why I readily turned to humour in political campaigns and kept social contact with many of our activists. Thus, among some compliments, he more than once said that my failing was that I lacked gravitas. He was probably right, although I may have had the plebeian touch, which I did not regret. Like Tyndall and myself, Enoch Powell was a grammar school boy. Of middle class background – mine was the impoverished former nouveau riche – I do not think that his scholarly distinctions, including his love of Greek and Latin meant that he was copying the attitudes of the old ruling class. He certainly was not ‘plebeian’ but he had great appeal with his stand on immigration and withdrawal from the EU from working class people, as manifested in the marches against immigration by such 'plebs' as the dockers and the Smithfield meat porters.

Certainly the charge of being 'distant' is valid. I noticed this when I had a short conversation with him when he and I were in the hospitality suite prior to appearing on the BBC Timewatch program on the history of immigration in Britain broadcast in April 1995.

Oswald Mosley's upper class origins seemed only to work to his advantage with the overwhelming support he gained – certainly in BUF days – from the so-called working class. This was due more to his character, his First World War service with the Flying Corps and the high office he obtained in the Labour Party, than his class origins. Pre-war he was closely connected with the party and spoke regularly at indoor and outdoor rallies all round Britain, being injured from missiles on several occasions. As I have stated, post-war he spent much of his time out of the country, first in Ireland and finally in Paris. Overall, I think the class system had little effect in holding back the fortunes of British nationalism.

You are right that the left-wing Alex Salmond who poses as a Scottish nationalist has made great progress because his actions are rooted in the Scottish people. But I would still only rate him as a sergeant, rather than an officer. As for Griffin, only a lance-corporal – but a quick-witted one, particularly where personal gain was possible!

CBL: One of the odd political legacies of the BUF and Union Movement seems to be Lee Kuan Yew's People's Action Party. The party was formed in 1954 by English-educated professionals who had returned from university education in the UK. As you are probably aware, it has a logo that is surprisingly similar to the BUF's flash and circle logo, and the party members even have the equivalent to the Black shirt, although in Chinese culture, white not black is the funerary colour, so they use white. Besides these possibly incidental similarities the Party also seems to apply the Fascist idea of the corporate state, not to remove social conflict between the classes, as these are not so important in Singapore, but instead to maintain peace between the different races, as this is the most obvious fracture line in Singaporean society. It has also been very successful in doing this and making Singapore an affluent society, which also obviously helps social and racial peace. What is your opinion of specific parallels between the BUF and UM on the one hand and the PAP on the other? Also, what do you think of the political affinities between so-called ‘Communist China’ and the fascist systems of pre-war Europe?

JB: It can hardly be coincidence that Lee Kuan Yew's PAP party chose the BUF and UM symbol of the lightning flash in a circle, together with the slogan "Action within social racial unity," apparently inspired by the BUF's more snappy "Action within Unity." According to an article in the Financial Times by John Burton in 2006, Lee acknowledged a design influence from the BUF symbol. He was in Britain 1949-51, where he read Law at Cambridge, obtaining a double first with honours. In his spare time he helped the Labour party in election campaigns. Apart from Labour's anti-colonialism it seems he was attracted to Fabian socialism, which was reflected in the PAP party policy from 1954 onwards. However, it could be said that Lee was a National Socialist in the literal sense, i.e. a nationalist as well as a socialist. Thus it would have been natural for him to admire Mosley and some of his policies, although not tactful to admit this at that time. With the Malayan, Chinese and Indian racial mix in Singapore Lee tried to create a unique Singaporean identity. His form of national socialism would aid this and counter any threat that could incite ethnic or religious violence. If one can strip away the distortions of what fascism and national socialism originally proposed (distortions mainly created by the wartime brutalities committed in their names), then I would say that 'Communist' China of today has moved far away from Maoism and with its control of capitalism for the national interest – as opposed to the West's globalism – it is more akin to the corporate state of fascism and national socialism. It is a path that India and Malaysia are also beginning to take.

CBL: I read once that Lee Kuan Yew may have known Mosley. Have you heard of anything along these lines?

JB: During the time that Lee was studying in Britain Mosley was living as a semi-recluse in Ireland busily writing his book The Alternative, in which he laid down his views for going beyond pre-war nationalism to 'Europe a Nation.' A long-term friend of mine and a dedicated follower of Mosley has been unable to establish any documented link between Lee and Mosley. As my friend says, if there had been a link, then Mosley would certainly have mentioned it in his autobiography, My Life published in 1968.

CBL: While you were in the League of Empire Loyalists you met John Tyndall; I think during the North Lewisham by-election. What early recollections do you have of the man?

JB: In 1957 I was put in charge of outdoor meetings of the League of Empire Loyalists in their North Lewisham by-election. Among the new young people who turned up to help was a twenty-two year old John Tyndall Although he was a very serious young man, with firm opinions, who did not appreciate my readiness for humour, we got on well. Although being anti-communist, the previous year he had visited Moscow with the Young Communist League. Apparently while there he stuffed anti-communist leaflets, designed and printed by him, under the doors of the hotel. I mention this because it was indicative of an inability to foresee the results of his actions, which in this case could have meant he would be locked up for years by the Soviet comrades. It was at Lewisham that I became aware that, although he was an admirer of Hitler, he had little time for Germany as such – or any other 'foreigners,' come to that. Such was his patriotism that I had the impression that secretly he wished Hitler had been British! It must be said that in his later years he regretted his pro-Hitler and pro-British Nazism statements. Having known John Tyndall throughout his political life (and also his family in the early days), I wish to record my admiration for his tenacity in pursuing his fight for his brand of nationalism, for his mental as well as physical courage, and for his honesty in everything he did. It may be hackneyed to say so but in his case it really was "what you see is what you get."

CBL: As you mentioned, the League of Empire Loyalists were famed for their prankish, student-rag-like stunts. You left the group after Chesterton asked you to 'soot' the TV commenter Malcolm Muggeridge after he criticized the Queen. You refused to do this, but in Many Shades of Black you also mention that you invited John Tyndall and that he refused. What were his reasons for refusing and did they influence your decision not to perform the 'mission'?

JB: My happiest times in the League of Empire Loyalists were spent campaigning in the North Lewisham by-election. After three years of popping out of boxes at opponents' meetings or awarding a coal scuttle to Anthony Eden for "scuttling the Empire," I realized that this was not in accord with my growing radical nationalist beliefs. Tyndall had never participated in the stunts and I only asked him to join me in the plot to 'soot' Malcolm Muggeridge because I no longer saw any political purpose in these actions and wanted to test him out for his future co-operation with me. JT agreed and gave me his support in our breakaway to form the National Labour Party.

CBL: Radicalism is often connected in the average mind with extremism. A good example is the term "anti-Semitism." This has the connotation that it is automatically wrong, and of course certain forms of anti-Semitism would be hard to objectively defend within a context of normal Western values, but a case could also be made that Jewish interests are antithetical to broader Western values and interests. Your earlier mention of "Jewish money and its reflected power in the media," hint at its separate agenda. Professor Kevin McDonald has done a lot of work explaining the antithetical nature of Jewishness to Western civilization, noting the contradiction of Jewish support for their own ethnostate with their opposition to ethnicity as an organizing value of other, especially White European states. Regardless of tactical concerns about not upsetting a powerful group with money and media influence, do you think there is truth in the idea that the Jews as a group have a clear tendency to undermine White European ethnostates and interests and that this therefore provides a basis for a kind of rational, objective, and even moral anti-Semitism that is distinct from the hate-filled and religiously inspired anti-Semitism of the past?

JB: I believe that a case can be made that many Jewish interests are antithetical to traditional Western values and interests. The effect of religion is minimal, not least because Christianity has its roots in Judaism. For that reason I have decried the hate-filled and religiously inspired anti-Semitism of the past. The origin of the antithesis between the European and Jewry lies in the Diaspora. In order to survive as small minorities, originally exclusively as a religion then latterly as a people whose beliefs ranged from orthodoxy to agnosticism, putting all Jewish interests first within each host nation of Europe became paramount. Thus over a millennium we saw the rise of powerful Jewish groups that became operative as one international body. With the media power that resultant Jewish money was able to buy, came its antithetical nature to Western civilisation, which you quote above from Professor Kevin McDonald.

CBL: The above question also relates to a wider problem that nationalism has had: the fact that views that are essentially moderate and reasonable, and which the majority of people naturally support, are stigmatized as somehow "extreme" or "twisted" and "evil." Why has it been so easy for the opponents of White nationalism to popularize the notion there is "something of the night" about nationalist views? Is it just the media power of the globalists or is it the "Hitler effect"? If it is the second, will time see this diminishing as a factor?

JB: The 'Hitler effect,' i.e. 'nationalism leads to war and genocide,' does diminish with time and is now secondary to the fact that in addition to many media outlets being owned by globalists, journalists and TV news and documentary programme producers and editors are dominated by the Guardian school of liberal internationalists. This is not just confined to the BBC. ITV News and Channel 5 (owned by porn king Richard Desmond) in the UK frequently outdo the BBC in pushing multiculturalism. Their work is made easier by the tendency of most Brits – and Whites in general – to be particularly hospitable to those who would appear to have fewer advantages in life. The media’s presentation of UK medal winners in the London Olympics is a case in point. Britain won 29 gold. Of which 24 were won by 'white' Brits and the remaining five golds won by four black competitors. In no way would I diminish the ability of the non-white athletes, with Mo Farrar and the almost-white Jessica Ennis being outstanding, but the media presentation was that it was a great achievement for multicultural and multiracial Britain. I had to remind a few relatives and neighbours that in cycling, rowing, swimming, sailing and equestrian events – where most of our golds were won – not one Afro-Asian under any flag was present. A gentle reminder that, similarly, there were no whites in the 100 metres final hopefully reminded them that the Olympics also emphasised the varying abilities of the world's races.

CBL: In Europe, nationalism has been enjoying mixed fortunes from the possibly hollow successes of civic nationalists like Alex Salmond and the limited and now apparently evaporating success of the BNP to more substantial successes of various European nationalist parties. Do you see a pattern that explains the difference between failure and relative success, or is it always a case of very particular specific factors in each country?

JB: First, I do not consider Salmond to be a 'nationalist,' whether 'civic' or in any other form. He is a liberal internationalist with the astuteness of cashing in on many Scots' national pride, which they feel is dominated by the vastly numerically superior population to their South. He has openly expressed pride in the fact that Scotland's population has increased solely due to Afro-Asian immigration. The present day failure of nationalism in wider Britain is due almost exclusively to the diminishing support given to the BNP. Its present leader knows this but refuses to step down, which means that because the BNP name is so well known no new nationalist movement has much of a chance of success at this stage.

CBL: There seems to be something of an Anglo-Euro split, with the globalist tendencies of the English speaking world working against nationalism. Germany is a special case of course, with the legacy of the reaction to National Socialism countering post-war nationalist movements. This Anglo-Euro split suggests that a possible problem is our cultural connection to the United States. How much of a drawback in building an effective nationalist movement is our cultural intimacy with America? Can this ever be countered or will it eventually defeat itself as deeper contradictions arise?

JB: In theory Nationalism in Germany should have a more difficult task of exerting a greater socio-political influence than the present moribund state of British nationalism because of the reaction to National Socialism. The English speaking world, particularly through American power, destroyed National Socialism as a belief, aided by the ruthless Soviet military machine, which destroyed it even more physically. Nationalists could consider that the 'globalist tendencies' of the English speaking world that caused both the pre-war and present day Anglo-Euro split, could be used to our advantage, and not as the present conduit for Afro-Asian immigration and expanding rootless global capitalism. British nationalists even more than the nationalists of the Continent tend to blame America for their woes, not least because it was the prime hatchery for the rise of the international money power. This is quite different from the inventive power of America's post-Civil War industrial revolution which led to the enormous productive power it still has today. This came from the genius of 18th-19th century European immigration, dominated during that time by the nations of Great Britain, Germany and France. Although 50% of the US population no longer carries the genes of those White pioneers, there is still 160 million who do. I believe it is an essential requisite for American Nationalists to gather strength – and unity – so we can use the English speaking world connections for our mutual advantages.

CBL: Some nationalists also see the continued existence of the UK as a barrier to nationalism, because it creates a diluted, conglomerate "British" identity that can easily be further diluted. They believe that the break-up of Britain into its component and organic national parts – namely England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland – is a precondition to rebuilding nationalism. In your opinion is this analysis correct and is Britain itself the ultimate barrier to British nationalism?

JB: I would give considerable weight to this analysis. We should give thought to a British Confederation of the national states of England, Scotland and a united Ireland. The general feeling in Ireland is that our separation in the modern world was a phase that we had to go through to ensure justice and recognition of the individuality of the Irish people. The astounding reception given recently to the Queen in her visits indicates that a return to closer ties would be acceptable.

CBL: A similar case could be made regarding the European Union, that it is a factor that undermines the organic roots of nationalism. However, if there was enough of an upswell of nationalism across Europe, could the European Union actually help to amplify and consolidate a wider White European nationalism, or will the EU always be a force antithetical to European nationalism?

JB: The objective of the European Union was to form a single socialist state that would act as a major stepping stone to a world government. The collapse of the Euro will come within two years, for the simple reason that you cannot have a single currency without a single government. This has been brought about by the organic roots of nationalism being firmer than the internationalists thought. With the strong signs of co-operation between European nationalists, I would advocate a European Confederation of nationalist states, which I have commented upon in a previous article for Alternative Right.

CBL: To finish this long interview, I'd like to ask you a few questions about your involvement with the present BNP, a party which most agree has disappointed if not betrayed the hopes of nationalists. Your role in that party was to serve as the editor of Identity magazine, the flagship publication that always contained excellent articles and commentary. This gave you a position of intellectual leadership within the party. What was your editorial strategy or agenda during your tenure there? How did that work with the demands and interests of the party leadership, by which, of course, I mean Nick Griffin?

JB: I rejoined the BNP in 1999 when Nick Griffin was elected Chairman. I was encouraged by the progress the party began to make and readily accepted his offer to take over the editorship of its magazine “Identity” in late 2002. I edited 70 issues, during which it grew from a 16-page quarterly to a 32-page cultural as well as political monthly, well designed by Mark Collett (who also fell out with Griffin in 2009). Identity, without me, was replaced in the spring of 2009 by a badly-written newssheet mainly devoted to drumming up donations. I still retained my membership. I had few differences of opinion with Nick Griffin in the presentation of the magazine’s socio-political content – to which he contributed a regular article. Much of this was concerned with in-depth explanations of the fundamentals of nationalist policies. Where appropriate, I pushed this in the direction of European Nationalism via a European Confederation and through developing the theme of the necessity for the defence of the nations of the white world as a whole and its overall culture, including the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Only once did Griffin tell me "not to overdo it." Perhaps understandably he did not want to frighten off some of the Little Englanders with their belief that "all wogs begin at Calais."

CBL: Griffin is fast becoming the yesterday man of British nationalism, but he must have had some talents and good points to gain the leadership and lead the party in what was for a few years a promising direction. What were his strengths as a leader?

JB: Nick Griffin wrote some good articles, although they could sometimes be rather repetitive. He also had a good eye (no pun intended) for printer's errors. I was not over impressed by his public speaking, in that he was too hesitant and often appeared to lack true belief in what he was saying. This was evident in his appearance on the fateful BBC Question Time program. However, when talking among individuals he put them at ease and soon got himself accepted and gained short to medium term respect. This ability enabled him to work his way to the top on several occasions throughout his political career, starting with the National Front. No one can deny that an outstanding talent was his ability to get people to donate funds.

CBL: Although heavily attacked and vilified, the BNP made steady gains on councils, the London Assembly, and in the European elections. Then things started to go wrong. From your point of view as an insider, when did the rot set in and, in your opinion, what were the causes of it?

JB: With the one exception of when the BNP won an East London Council by-election in 1995, the purpose of fighting council elections was to get a double figure percentage of the vote. A victory was when a candidate beat one of the established parties and came third, or even second. The calibre of the candidate did not matter, because it was most unlikely that he or she would be elected. Those members with professional jobs were unlikely to stand because of the witch hunt that would often be organised by the liberal-left and aided by local and even national media. In no small part due to the new energy put into the Party by a still young Nick Griffin after becoming Chairman, local roots put down in mainly Northern cities and the East End and Essex borderland of London produced gold. The first BNP Councillors were elected in Burnley. By 2007 the BNP had almost a hundred Councillors, if you included a few unelected Parish Councillors. In Barking & Dagenham they had 17. The old established parties, Labour in particular, as it was mainly their seats that the BNP had taken, began to say that the BNP councillors were useless. Unfortunately, the local public began to see that in some cases this was true. Some elected BNP Councillors did not bother to attend even one Council meeting. The great tragedy was several excellent BNP Councillors, particularly the women, such as the highly respected Sharon Wilkinson in Burnley who held her seat to the very end, had lost their seats by 2010.

The next downturn in the Party's fortunes came with the fiasco of Griffin's appearance on the BBC Question Time program on October 22, 2009. He had considerable justification when he complained to the press on the following day that "it was a beat up Nick Griffin program instead of Question Time." He had opportunities to make some sort of answer to more than four of the 25 'questions' (mainly dressed up leftist slogans), but he seemed more concerned in presenting himself to Bonnie Greer, a US black playwright drafted in for the occasion, as a non-racist nice guy. Not only did this not work, but it was humiliating. Unfortunately, Griffin had no experience of arguing points in a council chamber or, as the diminishing band of veteran British nationalists had, of dealing with leftist hecklers at open air meetings, where interjection of a quick, telling point made or lost the day. The immediate reaction of most members to the Question Time kangaroo court was anger. But as weeks passed and families and friends made comments they realised that through its leader, unjustly or not, the Party had been humiliated.

The third major cause of the rot that set in with this party which had such a promising future was centred on its incapability of handling finances properly. This was covered in my e-mail letter to Nick Griffin dated August 28th 2010 in which I said that his resignation as Chairman would be in its best interest. I wrote:

"The British National Party must be forever grateful for the work you put in over the past decade which lifted the Party out of the doldrums of the latter end of the Tyndall era and has made its name a household word. However, it must be recognised that a major mistake was made by allowing the Midas Agency so much control of the Party. No matter how much one plays with words, the fact is that the BNP now has debts in excess of £500,000, which of course is not all of your making. The Party is haemorrhaging membership and is receiving abysmal voting percentages of 2-3% at recent council by-elections. It must also face the fact that as an unregistered company a court could decide we are insolvent and recommend that the BNP be wound up. It is highly likely that an opposition Nationalist party will shortly be formed which would draw off more disgruntled BNP members, with the result that neither such a new party nor the present BNP would gain a single Parliamentary seat within the next ten years – and time is not on our side. One step that would halt, or at least limit, this splitting of energies would be for you to recognise the veracity of the adage ‘the buck stops here’and resign as Chairman of the Party in the near future, as opposed to your intention of doing so three years hence. This would not only reduce the loss of more members, but enable you to regain the respect that we all had for you. Furthermore, it would allow you to concentrate on the North West constituency as the BNP's MEP and expect the full support of the membership in seeing that you were re-elected."

I received a courteous short reply from Nick in which he said he would reply in detail 'in the next few days.' He never did. In December that year I did not renew my membership.

CBL: Because of the degree to which British nationalism has been hamstrung by the decline of the BNP, there are many who believe a kind of "conspiracy theory" that Griffin is actually some kind of government plant. What is your assessment of the man? Is he a sincere but heavily flawed nationalist or is he something much worse?

JB: I do not believe that Griffin is some sort of government plant, although I can understand that the results of his actions can make some people believe so. He is a flawed nationalist in that I do not believe that he places his form of nationalism above the need to keep the extended Griffin family in reasonable prosperity.

CBL: There have been various breakaway movements forming from the BNP, such as the English Democrats and British Freedom. What is your view of these two movements in particular?

JB: The English Democrats wish to break up the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and as civic nationalists appear to place the Scots, for example, on a par with Third World immigrants. No true nationalist (let alone a European Nationalist) could possibly support them. They have no connections with any past anti-Semitic or racist movement, which they claim is the reason why the BNP vote was always destined to be limited. Yet although they oppose immigration on non-racial grounds – but secondary to their call for an English Parliament – after nearly a decade they still poll lower than the abysmal level of the BNP today. It would appear that their 'clean image' has achieved nothing. The British Freedom Party was formed in 2010 and attracted some disillusioned BNP members. Its leader, Paul Weston, is a former UKIP candidate. Understandably, its policy is predominantly anti-EU. On immigration Weston says: "We can have one culture and it's not important about what colour or race you come from." The BFP only fielded six candidates in the 2012 local elections, with a very low poll result of 0.6 – 4.2%. It is significant that British Freedom is also closely connected with the anti-sharia English Defence League that has demonstrated in most towns and cities in the UK with large Moslem communities. White Marxists allied with militant Moslems have regularly attacked the EDL demonstrators, many of whom are frequently arrested. Tommy Robinson is currently in prison, having been placed in a wing holding militant Moslem prisoners. Some long-term radical right and nationalist commentators have said that as Weston is Jewish and some EDL marchers have had banners denoting a Jewish Wing, both organisations are 'tools of Zionism.' I would point out to them that today my enemy's enemy is not necessarily my friend. I would not recommend support for British Freedom but EDL serves a purpose.

CBL: Soon it looks like a new nationalist party is to be launched centred on the group around Andrew Brons. What is your view of this party and its chances? Also, based on long and often painful experience, what essential advice do you have for any future nationalist party in Britain to be successful?

JB: I must now be the Mr Micawber of British radical right politics in that I still hope that “something will turn up.” We could see a new nationalist party formed very shortly centred on the group around Andrew Brons. However, to be fair to Andrew he has consistently stated that he does not want to be such a party's leader. He has also made it clear that in 2014 he will not be standing for his seat as an MEP at the European Union elections. In my opinion both decisions are a pity and I do not consider 65 being too old (well, I wouldn't!). I am not betraying any confidences in saying that the deciding factor is really centred on the sufficient financial backing that is needed to get an embryo party off the ground. Some has already been promised. But no matter how much is raised the main stumbling block that any new party has to face is that Griffin's BNP holds the centre ground of nationalism. For good or for bad his is the name that is known and there is the awful possibility that we may not have the time for any new party to surpass him in recognition by the British public.

Read more...>>>

Herbie Hancock, musician

I interviewed Herbie Hancock by telephone on the 19th of July, 2007. We spoke for around half an hour about his forthcoming Quartet tour to Japan, his then soon-to-be-released, Joni-Mitchell-inspired album “River: The Joni Letters,” and his Buddhist faith.

HH: Hello

CBL: Hello, is that Herbie?

HH: Yeh, hi.

CBL: This is Colin Liddell phoning from Japan.

HH: Hi there, how ya doing?

CBL: Yeh... This is the International Herald Tibune Asahi Shimbun newspaper, and it’s about your tour here in October, and, basically, just a very general article about you, maybe focusing on what the fans can expect when you come over. OK?

HH: OK.

CBL: I’d just like to ask you first, apart from doing press interviews as you are at the moment, what else have you been doing recently?

HH: I’ve been working on a new record of my own. Actually, we hope to ship in September. It’s really finished and I just approved the master’s reference copy. It’s called “Rivers.”

CBL: “Rivers”?

HH: “River.” And basically the songs are all by Joni Mitchell, from her library of compositions, except for two songs that she didn’t write, and those two are on the record because one of them had a big influence on her when she was very young. That’s the tune “In My Solitude” a recording that Billie Holiday made. When she nine or ten she heard that and it really moved her it really touched her. It had a decided effect on her. By the way, when you hear her sing today you hear a lot of Billie Holiday in it.

CBL: On the actual album, is it mainly instrumental or is there actually any singing on it?

HH: Yes, it’s almost half and half. Nora Jones sang a track, Tina Turner sang a track, Corinne Bailey Rae did one [garbled], Luciana Suza did one and also Joni sang one of her pieces “The Tea Leaf Prophecy.” It’s a completely different version. And also there is one that is spoken word, one where the lyrics from one of her songs is just spoken, and it’s by Leonard Cohen.

CBL: So, Leonard Cohen also features on the album?

HH: Yes. That piece is actually a duo piece. He speaks the lyrics to the song and I improvise the piano accompaniment.

CBL: Between his words or at the same time?

HH: At the same time. It’s sort of like the soundtrack of the words.

CBL: He’s living in the mountains somewhere near Los Angeles in some sort of monastery, I heard.

HH: Yeh. Actually we didn’t do it at the same time. I had to do it after him, because I was actually on tour when he did it. He didn’t want to be in the studio with me.

CBL: We don’t want to say that!

HH: He didn’t want to do it at exactly the same time, because he wanted to be able to concentrate in it.

CBL: What was it that attracted you to this album and also to Joni Mitchell’s songs?

HH: Because her lyrics are genius, incredible poetry. They are real poetry. We called it “River” because it is the name of one her songs, the one that Corinne Bailey Rae does. But river is a metaphor for flow…

CBL: For intransience

HH: Yeh. It’s very peaceful and calm but yet there are ripples in it too. And just like water… Water takes the shape of the container that it is in. It doesn’t have a specific… We are hoping that the container will be the person that he is in, do it their own way.

CBL: It has this flexibility this ability to assume many forms and transcend many situations. So it’s a kind of philosophical reference or resonance.

HH: Right. Exactly. And what I took on as a challenge for this record was the idea of the lyrics really being the driving force, the focus for the performances, and, when we first started putting the ideas together for the record, my intention was really to get into the lyrics and find out what they mean, the circumstances under which she wrote the lyrics, what provoked her to write a particular song, whichever direction it took, anything about the inside of a particular song. And weeks of conversation I had with the record producer Larry Klein about that. And Larry actually was at one time married to Joni, so he knows a lot about her.

CBL: Maybe he knows too much about her.

HH: Ha ha ha! Maybe too much about her, right. The things that he had questions about, he’d call her up. They are very much friends. He’s produced many of her records, including a few of her more recent records.

CBL: How do her songs work with what you do? How does that spark you off? And what sort of things do you throw into the mix?

HH: Here’s what we did. When we went to actually record the tracks with the performers, Dave Holland on bass, Wayne Shorter on saxophone, Vinnie Colaiuta on drums and Lionel Lueke, a young African guitar player from Benin. We all had a copy of the lyrics and we sat in the engineer’s booth and we all discussed the lyrics before we recorded a note. Before every tune we would have a discussion about the lyrics and then kind of get a sense of our individual take on it or individual view.

CBL: or response to it?

HH: Right, exactly, and then we went in and recorded. And…

CBL: So you got all these different reactions to the lyrics and then you’re recording, because each individual reacts a bit differently…

HH: Right, and yet we played together. But the one thing we discussed is, the lyrics are in many cases stories that have a particular environment, and so we thought about what that environment might be. An example is the song “Edith and the Kingpin.” It’s about a club where this pimp walks in and it’s this place where pimps and prostitutes hang out, in a small town. And the band is playing but the band is not really that great a band. The lyrics say the band sound like typewriters – ha ha ha! – but the big man he spots Edith who is a young, fresh… She’s also a working girl too. It’s kind of hard. They kind of use each other.

CBL: With a lot of wit? From how you’re describing, it that almost sounds like a kind of comic situation.

HH: Well, it’s more like black comedy, I guess. Not really comedy. There’s a dark element to it, but it’s a story. This Edith is a new girl and the other girls are looking at her, and, like, they’re whispering among themselves. But then the pimp looks at her and he’s like ‘Mmmh alright,’ and so then the other girls, they start talking to her, telling her stories about him. ‘Watch out for this guy,’ and the next thing they are together. So there are characters in this, so, in a way, we took on the role of characters. For example Wayne Shorter mentioned…

CBL: Which character were you in that case?

HH: Wayne was the one that actually voiced the desire to kind of examine things that are in the room, like other conversations that are happening in the room. He might do a little bit of that. But when you actually go in to record, you don’t think about any of that. But, before, you kind of throw ideas up in the air and then hope that somehow it marinates. As far as a character, I didn’t actually think about a particular character. I was thinking more about the general environment.

CBL: That album, we could talk about it at great length, but it comes out in September and you’re touring here in October. Will that feature on the actual tour. Will you be using material from Joni Mitchell on the tour?

HH: That’s going to be very difficult. It’s possible. It might be possible to do one of the pieces. It’s a very different band. Not that very different. Wayne Shorter was on the project too but Jack DeJohnette and Ron Carter were not. It’s possible that we could do something from that. That is if the guys from the band want to do that.

CBL: But mainly it’ll be reprising the VSOP and the Quintet era won’t it, I imagine from that line up.

HH: Well I would imagine that we’ll be touching on those places – VSOP, the Miles Davis experience – because all of us had at one time or another played with Miles. But one thing’s interesting. As well as we have known each other and recorded with each other, the four of us have never performed together. I mean I have performed with Ron and Wayne, but never with Jack DeJohnette.

CBL: He was over here not so long ago with Keith Jarrett.

HH: Oh? Yeh, yeh.

CBL: So, I managed to see him that time. You’re well known especially for working with Wayne. What other factors influenced this particular line up?

HH: One thing I wanted to mention. I’m pretty sure we won’t just play the old pieces. Wayne is a very prolific writer and I wouldn’t be surprised if he submits something either from his catalog or something new that we could examine. Perhaps Ron might have something. Let’s see when we get closer to the date. So far we haven’t had any sessions about it yet. So I’m only speculating about what we’re going to do. We have plenty of time to do that. I mean not plenty of time. We’ve got enough time. We’ve got three months.

CBL: You’ve played with different sizes of groups – quartets, quintets, sextets, whatever. What are the advantages and the disadvantages of playing in different sizes like that?

HH: Well it’s funny that you should mention that because just recently I had to, just for three gigs, switch from a format that I have had for the past say year, worked on for almost a year. I’ve been doing things kind of… no not a year, about half a year, more than half a year. For three quarters of a year, I have been doing quartet stuff with Vinnie Colaiuta on drums, who was on the record, with Nathan East on bass, and Nathan’s also been singing some of the pieces from “Possibilities.” And I had to work as a Trio for three gigs because Vinnie wasn’t available, but Terri Lyne Carrington, who I have worked with for many, many years, she was available for drums. Nathan was available, but, like I said, it was a quartet before. Lionel Lueke was the guitar player, who was also the one on my new record, and he wasn’t available, so I played Trio with just Nathan and Terri Lyn. We were still able to do the pieces I had been doing as a Quartet. I pretty much decided to make a sequence of material and follow that sequence on a tour, on several tours. We were able to do that and still do some of the songs from my latest record “Possibilities” with Nathan singing. To answer your question, it gives, The Trio setting gives you a lot of space to kind of compose yourself to use the space as a non-phonic element in the sound, so it becomes part of the sound, the space.

CBL: It’s a very almost Japanese concept of space.

HH: Yeh, right, exactly.

CBL: This would be something that is maybe influenced by your Buddhism as well?

HH: Well, everything ties into the Buddhism, because that’s the first thing I do when I wake up to… as a foundation to shape my life in order to shape my day. But I know why you drew that reference, because the Buddhism I practice comes more directly from Japan, the concerts are in Japan, but in truth I don’t think of the Buddhism I practice as a Japanese religion anymore than we think of Christianity as a Middle Eastern religion or Judaism as a Middle Eastern Religion. For me Buddhism is a religion for people…

CBL: Yeh. It’s a very universal thing?

HH: Yeh, exactly.

CBL: It just hasn’t been overlaid by a certain rule-heavy Western rationalism, and that’s why it’s a very clear source of this Universal thing.

HH: Yeh, yeh, right. We don’t have rules for the particular Buddhism I practice.

CBL: I mean some people see analogies between Zen and jazz as well. Both things happening in completely different parts of the World…

HH: Right. I understand that. Zen is not the Buddhism I practice but I understand what your saying. Using the reference that you use, to me it sounds more like a traditional way people look at Buddhism. And the Buddhism I practice, is not Asian, it doesn’t have those same kind of references. It really, it’s so… because it’s about the human being, and human beings appear at different parts of the world, it gets shaped by the environment it happens to be in, so in America I wouldn’t say its American, but its not different from America.

CBL: Well it kind of comes back to that analogy of the river, doesn’t it? The water is everywhere but takes on different shapes according to the locale.

HH: RIGHT! Absolutely.

CBL: So, what about the essence of your Buddhism? How would you actually describe what’s important? What’s key in that, and, maybe, how does that also reflect itself in some of your music?

HH: That life, that everything – what I’m going to say is not so profound – but everything is connected, and that the Universe is actually in your life and that the practice of Buddhism is to support the deepest part of your life, which we call your ‘Buddha nature,’ and for you to experience what we call in Buddhism ‘human revolution,’ and that is the steps that need to be taken to remove the things that filter you from being able to reveal your true self. And that true self is one that relates in a very deep way to everything else in your environment.

CBL: What sort of things would prevent you from revealing your true self? What sort of factors would you include there?

HH: A lot of just external factors. The causes that you make. The Buddhism that we practice is about cause and effect. It’s about the law that is the foundation of everything, and the causes that you make through life – that are really moment to moment decisions that you make and turn into action – affect you in a certain way that can cloud over the true essence of your life, and it’s your responsibility as a human being to really discover who you are, and this Buddhism really helps you to do that so that you manifest your highest condition of life.

CBL: I can see how this is very relevant for somebody in your position, because, first of all, everything is connected and you’re very well known as a collaborator. You’ve worked with many people and many styles of music. So, musically, in that case, everything is connected, and also trying to find your true self, it’s sort of digging deep trying to find something fresh and original to say. So it resonates very well with your career doesn’t it?

HH: But it would resonate with any human being no matter what path you take in your life or whatever you be personally. Actually, [garbled] become happy for everyone, and to find the kind of happiness that would be a basis for peace throughout the World.

Read more...>>>

Ami Clarke, conceptual artist

In early 2012, I interviewed the artist Ami Clarke about her show at The Container in Tokyo. The Container is literally that, a shipping container that has been inserted into a hair salon. The show was a disappointment, featuring a video of a clip from the 1960s TV show "The Prisoner" showing a large balloon bouncing around, a smaller video of an eye blinking, and "Unpublish," a couple of sheets of paper containing an imagined conversation with Bradley Manning, a US soldier arrested for leaking classified information. According to the press release the show was supposed to be a profound exploration of issues surrounding information control in the internet age. I interviewed Ms. Clarke by email.

CBL: What is the connection between "The Prisoner" and our modern state of information flow that your work purports to critique? Surely the problem we have today is too much freedom rather than not enough.

AC: The press release is always a slightly irksome thing for me in that there is a desire by the gallery to overly describe the work in some way. I think that the work should be seen on its own terms. You do not need necessarily to know the details/reference. These details configure during the making of the work, but don't necessarily remain in the open. I think people commonly pick up on "The Prisoner" as sharing some traits with current times with respect to 'data-mining', in the persistent attempt by 'the Village' authorities to extract from 'Number 6' why he has resigned. Western ideas, re:- the cult of the individual and the sovereignty of the subject so imbricated in capitalism, lurk somewhere within these ideas.

CBL: Even without Wikileaks and Bradley Manning, it's quite apparent what America is up to. His leaks add nothing, except perhaps a little superfluous detail to the picture. Agree?

AC: Absolutely, but I think the details that were disseminated are said to have been a crucial part of raising public awareness of the corrupt practices in the countries dealing with the US.

CBL: Anyway, isn't objective knowledge becoming some kind of commodity that you can "buy" in "packages" to support whichever subjective viewpoint that you are inclined to take?

AC: You could be right there.

CBL: The exhibition leaflet talks about "late capitalism"? Shouldn't that be Latte Capitalism (people texting and FBing from Starbucks)? Politically what is your position? Using terms like "late capitalism" suggests you see revolution just round the corner. What kind of revolution are you anticipating?

AC: Ha! Well, I'm not expecting revolution of any sort we've seen before, so it would be hard to identify it as such, but there are changes afoot. It could of course go either way, i.e. stricter control of the internet replacing the freedoms we have got used to so far, which come of this early Wild West stage. We have an exhibition with several well known speakers talking: Paul Mason, financial editor of Newsnight (author of "Why its kicking off everywhere"), Andrew McGettigan and Nathan Charlton (Big Ideas) coming up at the project space I run: Banner Repeater, that discuss some of these ideas further: "How its kicking off everywhere". It's a shame you're not here - I think they're going to be great.

CBL: Why don't you just release your videos on the internet? What do they gain by being seen in the Container? Is this a recognition that there is too much distraction on the internet and that only by showing things away from it will they be seen? Does the internet, FB, Twitter and the flow of information represent a kind of sensory/ cerebral overload and blindness? Isn't this the way that truth is distorted along the lines of "You can't handle the truth (because there's too much of it)"?

AC: Sculpture can be about time and space ... and video for me for a while was also about these qualities similarly found in film and video, but recently I've become much more interested in the image and the relationship between the moving image and the audience. The work's specific in that it deals with this encounter with the image. I would hesitate to say more than that. It's quite possible to experience this, I think, without any prior knowledge or context that may come of "The Prisoner." The collection of material presented parodies a research project in that it proposes an experiment in looking. The image, in its variety of appropriated media, begs the question: what is it I'm seeing/experiencing? The clumsy lo-fi effect of the early object/prop, reductively being replaced by more homogenised images, via the Renault advert, and the most recent CGI footage, goes beyond any simple comprehension. Any single point perspective is abandoned to the immersive experience confronting you in such a small space. Whilst employing some familiar tropes in de-constructing the moving image it doesn't point to an easy reading of this by doing so.

CBL: Why did you go for such a diffuse and frankly unreadable style in "Unpublish"? I might have missed something, but it was certainly a chore to plough through. Is it a reflection of the breakdown of objective language with objective reference points and the paradox that more communication is ultimately less communication?

AC: The publication touches upon similarly misleading ideas regarding technology, open-ness and democracy. The management of on-line data is exceptionally open to abuse in that it is very easy to delete so that no trace is evident of it ever having been there. You would have had to know it was there in the first place. Julian Assange (Wikileaks founder) whilst in conversation with Hans Ulrich Olbrist talks about ideas relating to this, which he calls: "Un-publishing." Contrary to what we may suspect, traditional print media has a potentially longer shelf life, through the wide distribution of papers that resists the censorious reach of the authorities, commercially or politically motivated, hence the printed material form. My text work is often influenced by the sound of words; their rhythm and syncopation, and takes an improvised form. As you say there is an avoidance of an easy reading and one that I hope employs a licentious, and sometimes humorous approach to the material. I've had some favourable feedback specifically from younger students, which interestingly implies it’s not entirely opaque. I've been interested in art writing for a while now and the reading room and project space, I mentioned before, has an archive dedicated to artists published material. We're sited on a railway platform at Hackney Downs train station that has 4,000 people a day passing through, and one of our ambitions is to broaden this audience a little. I realise it's perhaps early days for this material to become more widespread, but It's very interesting times in terms of publishing, and the development of the form of the book. We're at the ICA this Saturday for the Publish and Be Damned fair here in London.

Read more...>>>

Kieran Webster [The View]

I spoke to Kieren Webster, the bassist from the View on the 12th of April, 2007. The interview was a little difficult because the line was poor, Webster spoke with a heavy Dundee accent, and also he was suffering from a hangover. I was in Urawa, while he was at the Glasgow Barrowlands, where the band was in the middle of soundchecking. During the 18 minutes we talked, he only name-checked this blog 12 times.

KW: Hullo.

CBL: Hello Kieren. This is Colin Liddell in Japan, eh, interviewing you on behalf of the International Herald Tribune Asahi Shimbun…

KW: Uhu.

CBL: …about your forthcoming trip to Japan, and…

KW: Yes.

CBL: …basically the articles just about the band so far, the history, and what’s going on and how you feel about things. So, it’s just a general, eh, outline of everything, and so I’d just like to ask you a few questions about, um, everything really.

KW: Yes.

CBL: Where are you right now?

KW: I’m in the Barrowloands in Glasgow, the famous Barrowlands ballroom in Glasgow.

CBL: Aha, so you’ve got a gig on tonight?

KW: Yes.

CBL: Aha. And you’ve been doing a soundcheck? Is that right?

KW: Yehhh, I’m just halfway through it at the moment.

CBL: Mmh. OK. Well, I'd like to go back to the beginning. What got you into music in the first place? How did that happen, and how did you and Kyle start writing together?

KW: Well, me, Kyle and Pete all got to hanging around at the same time, when we were 15, and we just started playing together in the house and stuff. Then, we were in a covers band for a while. And me and Kyle were also playing our own songs at parties on acoustics. At parties, people were always saying, 'why don't you start a band?' And we always meant to, but we never had any money for rehearsal space, but we got offered a free rehearsal space in the pub called the Bay View. So there we started [garbled] And that’s when we started writing together.

CBL: So, you started doing all the cover versions first and then from that you progressed into writing?

KW: Yes.

CBL: Aha. So…

KW: It's a natural thing to do, y'know whadda mean?

CBL: I don't want to, eh, give you a big head or anything like that, but that's quite similar to the way the Beatles developed, isn't it?

KW: Yeh. Yes, they did covers as well and stuff like that.

CBL: Yes, they started on covers then they thought, 'let's write our own stuff as well.'

KW: [garbled] copy other people's stuff, but the people you look up to they're just copying a lot of thing… They're not even… You’ve just got that to do for yourself.

CBL: Is it maybe easier to write your own songs after a while?

KW: Eh, yes. It's easier to remember your own songs. I can't remember any of the covers that I used to play at parties and stuff. It was always [line interference] to play them [garbled] only play our own songs now.

CBL: OK. I'd like to ask you about the big break. It's, em, sort of… In most of the things I've read about you , eh, the key moment seems to have been when you decided to give your demo tape to Pete Doherty.

KW: Yes.

CBL: Em, what, eh, what was actually on that demo tape?

KW: Em, there were four songs on it. Em, there was Streetlights, Screaming and Shouting, Face for Radio, and Coming Down. They're all on the album, except Screaming and Shouting's the only one that's not on album. That was on the first demo.

CBL: Why did you, eh, decide to, eh, give it to Pete, because he's got a bit of a reputation for, y’know, being a bit chaotic and not, maybe, not knowing which day of the week it is?

KW: Eh, I know, but I know that he likes music and… I don’t really know, but I just thought… I just thought… I thought he'd let us on, and so I asked him and he did. I got it right. I thought… I knew he would. He's just… He's lacky [sic] like us. He’s just like anyone else. I mean I thought he would be the only person… There's really not that many people who would do that. Only him.

CBL: So, you didn't try giving the demo tape to anyone else before that did you?

KW: [line interference] other bands. I gave one to the Paddingtons when they played in Dundee. That was it [garbled and line interference]. We didn't… We never [garbled] like every other bands. We never really pushed… We never really pushed wurselves too much. We just used to give them to people who asked us for them or whatever [garbled and line interference]

CBL: I mean I can see some similarities, not between the music so much, but in the attitude between you and, y'know, Doherty’'s bands. Which is you try to create this atmosphere of having no barrier between the band and the audience.

KW: It's getting harder as we playing these bigger venues, though.

CBL: Yeh. I should imagine it will be impossible soon to, to keep that sort of cozy, close up relationship with the fans.

KW: Em, we'll always play small gigs as well. [garbled] Like we played in Dundee the other week. It was only like a 200 capacity venue. [line interference and garbled] …we're playing them so that people can know, are… Just, like in Dundee, are out the night and stuff.

CBL: I listened to the album, Hats Off To The Buskers, and, y'know, the thing that strikes you when you listen to it, y'know, it's just got this natural energy on it. And I was wondering how much of that was coming from your, eh, your fans and your audience, and how much is just from the guys in the band?

KW: I don't know, but we're all pretty energetic. Even when we're hung over everybody's running around playing football half pissed from last night. [line interference] If something is hard to do [line interference and garbled] that helps us out.

CBL: Um, yeh, well, yeh. Talking about always having a lot of energy, you've also sort of developed a kind of, a bit of a bad boy image as well. Eh, can you tell us…

KW: That's just like papers and stuff that have developed that.

CBL: But there have been a number of incidents as well, though, haven't there? I mean like, quite recently you couldn't go to America because of the cocaine thing.

KW: Yes…well…

CBL: I mean that must also be quite good for a band, though, having a bit of a bad boy image as well. I mean that must make you more marketable to a lot of, eh, your fans, coz that's what people want from rock n' roll, they want something a bit, y'know, dangerous, a bit rebellious, y'know, a bit out there.

KW: I don't think it's really rebellious taking drugs.

CBL: Sorry.

KW: I don't think its really rebellious taking drugs. I think there's better ways to be rebellious, like writing a rebellious song or I don't know. We don’'t try to promote any kind of image. We just do our thing and play our gigs. As long as people come we’ll keep playing them, y'know what I mean.

CBL: Yeh, uhu, so these things just happened, they're not intended, and then the media kind of blow it up. Is that how it goes?

KW: Yeh, yeh. It is like, sort of, things did happen, but you can focus on other things apart from that, y'know.

CBL: Yeh.

KW: Other godd stuff happens that never gets mentioned, y'know whadda mean?

CBL: Yeh. Yeh, I get the feeling you want to…

KW: That's what I meant by sort of just focus on it. I mean the Daily Star is printing stuff all the time and nobody really thinks [garbled] as soon as you get chucked out of hotels, it's all over the place. That's the way it is.

CBL: Yeh. Once you get the reputation, eh, it, eh, keeps, eh, generating more, eh, bad news, uhuh. Yeh. Also, I see you recently got an award, ah, for Wasted Little DJs, the Shockwaves NME award.

KW: Uhuh.

CBL: Yeh, I'd like to ask you, a b-bit about that song. Did you write that or did Kyle write that or was it, y'know, um, a collaboration?

KW: All our songs, they're a joint effort. Kyle wrote a lot of it.

CBL: With this particular song, how would that develop, I mean writing together?

KW: I don’t know. That was like just one off. That was spontaneous, just because the girls wanted us to write a song about them, so just done it y'know what I mean. It's quite an old song.

CBL: Mmh. So, did you write part of it and then, y-you handed it over to Kyle, back and forth, or did you just sit down together and try different things and, y'know, criticize each other…

KW: Normally one person comes up with an idea and then we both just sort of jam it out together, em, y'know what I mena, like I've got a few songs now that I need to show to Kyle because I can't finish them, y’'know what I mean, so… But me and Kyle will finish them.

CBL: So the musical ideas, you work out together. But what about the lyrics, though? Because one of the interesting points about this song is the way you use backslang or pig Latin as it's also known.

KW: Yes. That was Kyle's idea. He uses that all the time. Stick that in. Everyone uses it now.

CBL: Yeh, I mean, first time ever in a song, I think.

KW: Eh?

CBL: I think that's the first time ever that's been in a song, y'know, so that's definitely original anyway. And, em, you’ve been to Japan before, eh, in last December.

KW: Uhu.

CBL: Em, do you remember much of that?

KW: Yes. The people are really nice. They make you want to be a better person being in Japan. [garbled] It's really clean…

CBL: Yeh, it's quite a difference from Dundee, eg, I should imagine.

KW: Mm?

CBL: It's quite a difference from Dundee.

KW: Yes. Dundee's, mm, yes, very different.

CBL: How would you kind of describe your relationship to Dundee? Because in some ways it's a pretty bleak, y'know, town with not much to do, eh, but, at the same time, you've got this incredible fan base there…

KW: I have a love-hate relationship with Dundee [laughs]. I love it at the moment because I'm never there. But the reason why I wanted to get out [garbled] because I want to get back, know what I mean. Love/hate.

CBL: Love/hate? Is that one of the reasons you got into a band, though, because, y'know, Scotland's like that? There's not many opportunities unless you do something completely different.

KW: Eh, I think I got in a band because I liked to write songs.

CBL: Sorry.

KW: The only reason I got in a band was because I liked to write songs. I never really thought about doing that, y'know.

CBL: So it was, em, pull factors, not push factors? You weren't pushed into it by, y'know, having nothing else to do? It was just like you were pulled into it because you loved doing it? So, positive reasons, rather than negative?

KW: People said we were good, so yes. People said that we were good, so we just kept doing it.

CBL: I think you're coming to Japan in May.

KW: Yeh, quite soon, yes. We're coming for a week. We're looking forward to it.

CBL: What are you looking forward to most.

KW: Just playing the gigs, man. The Japanese fans are just so brilliant. Just playing the gigs, y'know, we look forward to wherever we go playing the gigs.

CBL: Anything besides the gigs, I mean, any interest in the culture, in going around seeing the sights, em stuff like that?

KW: I'm looking forward to… Yeh, we were only in Tokyo the last time. We're [line interference] really looking forward to it. [line interference] really nice to get a present.

CBL: You've had a very busy time in the last year or so, a lot of success. How’'s that changed things for you?

KW: I don’t know, em, it's harder to sort of just like, em, find time for anyone who's in your life, y'know what I mean, girlfriends, mums, dads, and stuff. It's just… What's good is… I guess [garbled] positive effect, and, aw I’m no feeling very good today. I’m just a bit hungover. Em, it’s just like, eh, it’s been, it's been… I don't think it's affected us in a bad way. I get to see my girlfriend all the time now. She's on tour with us t'isnow, even after shows and stuff [garbled]… y'know what I mean I guess it's a lot better than sitting on your arse and doing nothing, and signing on the brew.

CBL: Yeh, yeh, definitely.

KW: Mum and dad [garbled]

CBL: Because, yeh, one of the songs Tradesman Superstar kind of talks about that, doesn't it?

KW: Yeh.

CBL: Was that one of your lyrics or one of Kyle's?

KW: Yeh, one of my lyrics. That's a good song because it was written at a time when it was... I can't explain it all the time and I’ve never explained it before, um, it was written at the time when it was actually happening, y'know what I mean? I'll be looking back on that time and thinking, 'That was shit, I'll write a song about it.' That was happening at the time. Just what we meant, so…

CBL: The song suggests that you were getting some pressure, eh, maybe from your parents to sort of take on a more kind of realistic trade.

KW: Yeh, I wur. That's what happens to everyone in Dundee.

CBL: Yeh, and so you were having to…

KW: [line interference]

CBL: Could you repeat that? The line went a bit funny there.

KW: Em, what did you want us to repeat?

CBL: Just the last thing you said, because the line just went very funny for a few seconds. I couldn’t catch that.

KW: Alright… I can’t remember what I said.

CBL: I was asking about the pressure you were under from, maybe, from the family side to get a proper trade as it's called, and then…

KW: I'm just saying it's not bad [garbled]… I liked working on the building site and stuff, but if you want to do something else, you can. You don’t have to do it. If you listen to the song, it’s pretty self-explanatory. It explains itself.

CBL: Mmh. So, since the album came out, have you been writing, eh, a lot of songs?

KW: Yeh. Yeh, write songs all the time.

CBL: Is it a different direction or is pretty much the same sort of territory.

KW: They're just songs [garbled] I'm not going to start playing them on keyboards or anything [mutters]...

CBL: So, also the album was recorded with Owen Morris.

KW: Yeh, see I'm holding up four bands doing a soundcheck for the Barrowlands, so like, how long, how long… Are we running all night?

CBL: This'll be the last question, then.

KW: Alright. OK. They're all waiting on us finishing.

CBL: I just wanted to ask you how it was like to work with him and what his input into the album was.

KW: [garbled] a lot of bands he worked on, arrangements and stuff, but he didn't have to… He never changed any of the arrangements or anything, just he [garbled] when we done the demos, they sounded sort of… They were all sort of happy rocky stuff, and then we rerecorded some of the songs [line interference] He didn't want to record Streetlights because he just thought it was like a happy-go-lucky thing, but then we told him what it was actually about and he went, 'Aw no, that's [garbled] we'll have to do that one.'

CBL: Alright. That should be plenty of material for my article, so I’d like to thank you very much and wish you good luck.

KW: No problem.

CBL: OK, cheers.

KW: Thank you.

CBL: Bye.

Read more...>>>