Thoughts on language and power . . .

In a recent newsflash I shared some resources in response to the Ukrainian crisis. Thanks to all who followed up, and for the thoughts and actions you have taken. As you know, the news of unrelenting attacks on the Ukrainian people is horrific, as are Putin’s twists of logic in attempting to justify invasion. 

Since writing that, I have had feedback from some people in the Salon community that has helped me to expand my understanding and grasp the complexity of the situation, as well as the potential for blind spots and accidental omissions in describing such terrible events. 

First, one Salonista who is from Russia and has relatives in Ukraine called me to account: 

“Please, please do not say Russian invasion and Russian aggression, it is not! It is the Putin’s regime aggression and his and his clique’s invasion. Russia and the Russian people have never agreed to that. It is not done in my name and not in the name of other millions of Russians.” 

She is right, and I apologise. Although the circumstances were somewhat different, as an American I was aghast at the destruction that was wreaked when the USA invaded Iraq; I demonstrated against this invasion and sought to disassociate myself from the military action of the US government. The bravery of the Russian people who are now speaking out against Putin is astonishing and thanks to MG for helping me shift my language. 

I also had this feedback from another Salonista: 

“. . .  I feel terribly upset seeing the suffering of the ordinary people of Ukraine and up to yesterday I supported Ukraine against Russia. 

Sadly, reports are coming out about shocking racist practices being used by Ukrainian authorities against Black people, mainly students, and Indians trying to flee Ukraine. It is not widely reported but there are testimonials in the Independent, ITV, Twitter (#AfricansinUkraine) and the Black press . . .

I have written to the BBC to ask why reporters are not questioning Ukrainian spokespeople about these allegations. 

I have donated to crowdfunding for African students trying to flee . . .”

Since SA pointed this out to me, I have found various articles that have exposed these racist practices and there has been increased reporting. I want to express outrage and compassion for the Ukrainian people under attack, as well as the African nationals and Black refugees who are being discriminated against in their struggle to escape the war. This opinion piece by Daniel Howden also considers the varying responses to refugees and offers hope that the current crisis will result in an expanded empathic response to refugees from all conflict zones. 

In a recent discussion in a Proust study, we were examining the crash of the Union Générale in 1882 and how this shifted financial power in France before being used to support antisemitic myths about the power of Jewish bankers. As these myths repeat themselves even today (to the extent that one current French politician has proposed reconsidering the exoneration of Dreyfus, more than a century after his unjust and tortured incarceration), I found the research undertaken by study members to help understand how the Jewish bankers were scapegoated in the rising fury of antisemitism enlightening. In the process, I also learned that the form ‘anti-Semitism’ is no longer favoured and have updated my usage accordingly.

I appreciate how both in the studies and beyond, we have worked together to become more thoughtful about how language – a powerful and subtle tool – is used.

And finally, we have been asked to raise awareness of Packed with Hope, an initiative providing age-appropriate storybooks and a variety of comforting items (from hot water bottles to colouring pencils and notepads) to the many children caught up in the terror of being uprooted from their homes, family and friends in Ukraine. Please take a look and donate if you can.

The enduring appeal of the long read . . .

Some years ago, we were told about the great work Kate Slotover and Laura Potter were doing in opening up literature to readers everywhere. Laura and Kate founded The Book Club Review Podcast – an energetic discussion about what to read and how different readers may respond. In their words:

“We founded The Book Club Review Podcast to turn the solitary act of reading into a shared experience.

Loved the book? Loathed it? So much the better. We’re all about big opinions. We live for the great debate, the heated discussion, the ‘I see what you’re saying, but here’s why you’re wrong’ rant. With good humour. With respect. But with commitment too. Because the world has forgotten that disagreement is good for us. That it’s the friction of debate that sparks off new ideas, new perspectives – just like a good book. Bring the two together and there’s really nothing better.”

We are great admirers of their work which, as you can see, dovetails beautifully with the energy of exploration we generate in the Salon, so I was happy to spend a delicious February evening discussing doorstoppers – and WHY read them – with Laura, Kate and Phil Chaffee in the latest episode of the podcast.

The result is recommended listening for anyone who is either enjoying or feeling daunted by the ‘big’ books featured in Salon studies. If you like what you hear, take a look at previous episodes (including their 2019  interview with me about what the London Literary Salon does) and subscribe to the podcast newsletter to be alerted to new ones.

Item added to cart.
0 items - £0.00