The Queen and I
Sir: I did not expect Andrew Roberts (‘The meaning of a marriage’, 23/30 April), to agree with my New York Review of Books article on the royal family but, since he quoted from it, I would have thought he might have read it all the way through. True, the piece begins by setting out the reasons why one might have assumed these to be ‘anxious times for the House of Windsor’, from austerity to the Duke of York’s travails. But the bulk of the essay is dedicated to explaining why ‘the appeal of the royals remains resilient’, citing the Queen’s near-perfect performance as head of state, her provision of continuity in a fast-changing world and her connection with Britain’s solitary defiance of Hitler in 1940 — sentiments that would, I suspect, have most Spectator readers nodding in agreement.
Jonathan Freedland
London
Pilate study
Sir: Bruce Anderson, who thinks he knows a lot about the historical Pilate, says he was tough, corrupt and ambitious, and therefore could not have behaved on good Friday as described by St Matthew and St John (‘What is truth?’, 23/30 April). Who is he to judge? St John was almost certainly a witness of the events he describes, and the theme of truth runs through his gospel from beginning to end. Why would he want to deceive his readers? Besides, who knows how a Roman official, of whatever character, would have behaved when face to face with a man like Jesus? There’s a baying crowd outside, likely to spark a rebellion, and a saint in front of him, and he has to make the decision of his life. If he vacillated, it is hardly surprising.
Nicholas Debenham
Twickenham
Sir: Thanks to Bruce Anderson for his wonderful evocation of the Good Friday message. Read that, Professor Richard Dawkins, and reflect.
(Dr) Charles Wardrop
Perth
Eighties revival
Sir: Thank you for the moving and welcome tribute to the octogenarian generation (‘Golden Age’, 23/30 April). The 20th century witnessed fantastical levels of change and tumult. All the more remarkable is that we can meet people who were merrily there at the time. I recently had the great privilege of speaking for some hours with Denis Healey. Our conversation turned to the subject of his youth, and it occurred to me with a jolt that when he was my age, it was 1936. The second world war was yet to happen, George V was on the throne, and (as he told me) Africans at his college were beset with calls for ‘blacks out of Balliol’. The man who was there was there with me.
I shook his hand, which had once shook the hand of Bertrand Russell. Bertrand Russell’s aunt danced with Napoleon at Vienna. History is not the past; it is with us, in the old.
Robin McGhee
St Anne’s College, Oxford
Sir: In the otherwise inspiring article on the country’s over-80 achievers, the entry for Tony Benn begins ‘At a time when most politicians are seen as scum…’ This sort of red-top language is not only unwarranted and destructive, it is unworthy of The Spectator. As the entry is not attributed, the author is presumably a member of staff of the magazine, which makes it inexcusable.
Eric Fernie
Surrey
Sir: Despite your disclaimer that your list of distinguished oldies was ‘far from comprehensive’, I was saddened that you saw fit to omit a true Speccie hero, Sir Patrick Leigh Fermor, 96. His omission is even more puzzling and shameful given the inclusion of that Stalinist dinosaur Hobsbawm.
Graham Gilbert
France
Not Fish
Sir: Much as I dislike writers moaning about reviews of their books, may I rectify a point in Nicky Haslam’s review of The Day of the Peacock (Books, 23/30 April)? The cover photograph is Corin Redgrave, not Michael Fish. Incidentally, the text does not say that the Duke of Windsor’s clothes are ‘classical’. It says he had a passion for clothes and, being royal, could get away with what might have been considered eccentricities, so started a number of idiosyncratic fashions.
Geoffrey Aquilina Ross
By email
Border dispute
Sir: William von Raab (‘Mexistan’, 23/30April) condemns Mexico for the growth of narco-terrorism. Yet Wall Street and other elites are among the main consumers of drugs smuggled via Mexico and the weapons used to kill the 15,273 victims of the narco-terrorists last year were bought freely in the United States. America is right to be concerned but as long as the middle class snorts cocaine and US lawmakers refuse to regulate weapons, why is only the Mexican government to blame? Poor America. So near to coke, so far from gun control, and so full of politicians who confuse motes and beams.
Denis MacShane MP
House of Commons, London SW1
Right kind of Snow
Sir: A.A. Gill (Diary, 23/30 April) is way off beam when he states that Londoners who do not realise that the John Snow pub is named after the epidemiology pioneer believe it to be named after the Channel 4 newsreader. Right-thinking Londoners have always assumed it was named after the great Sussex and England fast bowler of the 1970s. I am still inclined to cleave to this view.
Tim Rice
London SW13
Sir: I am shocked at A.A. Gill and his view of Guardian readers. Does he not know that sensible, sensitive folk read both the Grauniad and the Speccie?
Roger Moss
North Yorkshire
Comments