Marqués de Tamarón || Santiago de Mora Figueroa Marqués de Tamarón: citas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta citas. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta citas. Mostrar todas las entradas

lunes, 3 de agosto de 2026

E al que hallaren faciendo fuego que lo echen dentro de él

(Alfonso X en las Cortes de Valladolid de 1256)




 

Más de uno, con cierto cabreo y mucha melancolía, dice qué triste y qué cansado es repetir que estamos perdiendo tantas cosas importantes y hermosas en nuestra tierra y que los poderes oficiales se desgañitan año tras año asegurando que van a impedir que vuelva a suceder.

Sin embargo los hechos cantan, lúgubremente. Este 2 de Agosto ya se habían quemado en España 226.157 hectáreas. Y esto no ha hecho más que empezar. No todos los que contemplan los fuegos lo hacen con indiferencia; muchos los ven con desesperación y otros con gusto. Pero el caso es que nunca he visto una lista con los nombres de los incendiarios y con sus condenas por los jueces. Diríase que no hay condenas. O que se mantienen secretos los nombres de los culpables, por algún motivo misterioso. Incluso daría que pensar a un surrealista “amargo y burlón” que no aparecen nombres de los incendiarios porque no hay tales condenas, y que ello se debe a que los jueces tienen miedo. O, peor aún, a que la política general del encarcelamiento es evitar gastos de las cárceles.

Y es que en España prender fuego al monte sale gratis. Habría que aumentar las penas en el Código Penal. Y cumplirlas, claro. Hace años escribí preguntando a amigos del PP y del PSOE cuántos incendiarios estaban en la cárcel. No saben, no contestan. Mientras siga saliendo gratis, los montes seguirán ardiendo. 

Puede haber casos en que el incendio no sea provocado directamente por un malnacido: caso, parece ser, de dos de los incendios actuales. Uno, por un coche eléctrico que explotó, y otro (creo que el de Almería con 13 muertos) por un poste de luz viejo y en desuso que se partió y los cables provocaron chispas. En estos casos también hay que exigir responsabilidad penal y multas a los negligentes. En Suiza al incendiario, por acción directa o negligencia, se le obliga a pagar el coste de la extinción del fuego, y se arruina.

 En resumen, hacen falta prevención, más medios de extinción y penas disuasorias de verdad.

Quienes duden, pueden inspirarse en el siglo XIII:

 Alfonso X el Sabio ordenó en el Fuero Real del Siglo XIII lo siguiente:

«Todo home que a sabiendas quemare mieses agenas, o pan en eras, o casas, o monte, quemen a él por ello, e peche todo el daño que ende viniere, por prueba, o por jura de aquel que lo recibió el daño.»

 Y el mismo Alfonso X el Sabio en las Siete Partidas establecía sanciones:

«De los daños que los omes, o las bestias fazen en las casas de otro de qual natura quier que sean […] como el que enciende fuego en tiempo de vento cerca de paja, o de madera, o de mies o de otro lugar semejante es tenido de pechar el daño que ende viniere.»

Y además el sabio monarca estableció en las Cortes de Valladolid de 1256 lo siguiente:

«Que no pongan fuego para quemar los montes, e al que hallaren faciendo fuego que lo echen dentro de él». 

 Tan severa sanción fue asimismo decretada por Pedro I de Castilla («el Justiciero», mejor que llamarlo «el Cruel») en 1350.

 Hay días como los de este mes de Julio en que se echa de menos a los viejos reyes castellanos y sus castellanas leyes.




Enlaces relacionados:
Actualización de los datos acumulados de los incendios según EFFIS (2026)
Se dispara el acumulado anual (2026)
Más incendios, también en Segovia (2026)
Más de lo mismo (2026)
El creciente desastre II (2026)
El creciente desastre (2026)
A 200 hectáreas por hora (2026)
La Danza Macabra (2025)
Que no pongan fuego a los montes so pena de echar al culpable dentro (2025)
La Danza Macabra II (2025)
El calor y la mala sangre (2022)
¿Por qué arde España? (2021)
Los hideputas hacen su agosto (2015)
Más hideputas que pirómanos (2013)
Nuevas informaciones sobre los incendios criminales (2013)
España, pronto en llamas (2013)
Más canallas impunes (2012)
Sigue la impunidad de los canallas (2012)





viernes, 26 de junio de 2026

La islamización del Reino Unido

 

La sorpresa mayúscula para muchos de nosotros fuera del Reino Unido fue saber -a través de un reciente texto aparecido en X (antiguo Twitter) el pasado 22 de Junio- que la presencia de personas influyentes y ostensiblemente musulmanas en los niveles más altos de las administraciones y la política británicas es abrumadora. El autor es el británico Simon Elmer que ha publicado The Great Replacement and the Islamisation of Britain el pasado Febrero. En dicho libro figuran estas líneas, que descubrió y me hace llegar Silvia Cortés:


Since 2016, the Mayor of London has been Sadiq Khan, a second-generation Pakistani immigrant and devout Muslim. The current Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, is also a Pakistani Muslim. The leader of the Scottish Labour Party, Anas Sarwar, is a Pakistani Muslim. There are currently 26 Muslim Members of Parliament, 4 Muslim members of the Scottish Parliament, including the former First Minister of Scotland, Humza Yousaf. 2 members of the Welsh Parliament are Muslim. The Mayor of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, Lutfur Rahman, is a Muslim. The Mayor of the London Borough of Newham, Rokhsana Fiaz, is a Muslim. 2 London Assembly Members are Muslim. 18 peers in the House of Lords are Muslim. And in 2025, at least 8 ceremonial mayors, who do not wield executive power but whose role is to normalise the Islamisation of Britain, were Muslim.

The UK, however, is not only run by its politicians but also by its civil service and the army of administrators at every level of the state apparatus and civil society. Placing a Muslim in charge of Britain’s capital city for a decade is one very obvious way to implement the Islamisation of Britain. Placing a Muslim in the office of Home Secretary is another. Placing a Muslim at the head of Ofsted is another. But the infiltration of the UK state by Muslims goes far beyond the scores of Muslims who now sit at the head of our councils, in the mayoralties of our cities, in our legislature and in the House of Lords.

It’s largely unknown to the general public, but Muslims have created a network of political, civil, military, legal, police, media, educational, health, financial and charitable bodies working towards the Islamisation of the United Kingdom.

Within the UK’s Government and Civil Service there operate today the Home Office Islamic Network (HOIN), the FCDO (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development) Muslim Staff Network, the Civil Service Islamic Society (CSIS), the Civil Service Muslim Network (CSMN) and the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPACUK).

Within the UK military there operates the Armed Forces Muslim Association (AFMA).

Within the UK judiciary there operate the Association of Muslim Lawyers (AML), the Muslim Lawyers’ Hub and the Muslim Lawyers Action Group (MLAG).

Within the parallel Sharia judiciary there operate the Islamic Sharia Council (ISC), the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT) and the Muslim Law (Sharia) Council.

Within the UK’s police forces there operate the National Association of Muslim Police (NAMP), the Association of Muslim Police (AMP) at the Metropolitan Police, the West Yorkshire Association of Muslim Police (AMP), the Scottish Police Muslim Association (SPMA) and the City of London Police Association of Muslim Police (AMP).

Within UK media there operate the BBC Muslim Network, the Channel 4 Muslim Network, the ITV Muslim Staff Network Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM), Muslim Engagement and Development (MEND), the Islam Channel, British Muslim TV, Muslim Television Ahmadiyya International (MTA International), the Ummah Channel, Ahlebait TV and 5Pillars.

Within the UK’s education sector there operate the Muslim Teachers’ Association UK (MTAUK), the Association of Muslim Schools and Institutes (AMSI), the British Muslim Teachers’ Association and the Federation of Student Islamic Societies (FOSIS).

Within the UK’s health sector there operate the National Muslim Staff Network (NMSN) and the NHS Muslim Network.

Within the UK’s charities there operate the Islamic Relief UK, Muslim Hands UK, Muslim Aid, Ummah Welfare Trust (UWT), Muslim Global Relief, the National Zakat Foundation (NZF) and the Muslim Charity UK.

And within the parallel Sharia financial system there operate 5 fully Sharia-compliant banks (Al Rayan Bank, Gatehouse Bank, the Bank of London and the Middle East, United Bank Limited and the Ahil United Bank), as well as 25 conventional banks which offer Sharia finance alongside conventional finance.

Other nation-wide Islamic organisations operating in the UK include the Association of British Muslims (AoBM), the British Muslim Network (BMN), the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB), the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) and the Islamophobia Response Unit.

In my book I look at how these various Muslim organisations and their financial backers in the Islamic world work together to lobby the UK Government and Members of Parliament to write and pass legislation that furthers the Islamisation of Britain.

The most recent example of the influence of such Muslim groups on UK legislation is the UK Government’s adoption of the definition of anti-Muslim hatred and Islamophobia written by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims. An organisation composed exclusively of Muslims, including 21 Muslim MPs and 5 Muslim Peers, this APPG is funded by the Aziz Foundation, a charity founded in 2015 by Asif Aziz, a Malawi-born Muslim property developer and billionaire whose company, Criterion Capital, has investments worth £6 billion in Britain, and who, since 2024, has been a tax exile in Abu Dhabi.

Another indication of how these Muslim organisations operate closer to the corridors of power — indeed, with the offices stationed off them — is the Civil Service Muslim Network, which lists, among its stated aims, the following:

•Represent, support, connect and champion Muslim civil servants across government.
•Generate a better understanding of Islam within the Civil Service and challenge discrimination and misconceptions.
•Create a network of senior allies who recognise the lived experience of Muslim colleagues and help improve religious literacy and respect.

Doubtless I’m not the only British person who cannot understand why such a network should be required in the UK if Britain is still a secular society rather than one, as I believe, that is already operating under aspects of Sharia law modelled on its implementation in Pakistan; or why it should not only be tolerated but given a place in our civil service, except as a platform — one of many built in Britain and largely with the taxes of the British people — for the Islamisation of Britain.

As for Muslim organisations operating within our police forces and legal system, it is contrary to the principle of police being officers of UK law, the adjudication of courts over sentencing under that law, and of everyone in Britain, irrespective of their religion, being equal before the law. The two-tier policing of the British people, the decades-long cover-up of the Muslim rape-gang network operating in 149 constituencies that we know of across Britain, and the gross travesties of justice handed down by these courts to Muslim rapists, murderers and terrorists is further confirmation that the UK is, indeed, already operating under Sharia law.

Like the UK’s 85 known Sharia Courts, which oversee child marriages in contravention of UK law, these Muslim associations, Muslim societies, Muslim committees, Muslim councils, Muslim non-governmental organisations, Muslim APPGs and Muslim networks have created a civil service, legal system and police force that operates within, but independent from and contrary to, the laws of the UK, which they seek to change through political lobbying of our Parliament and Government. Again, this is consistent with Sections 4 and 14 of Pakistan’s Enforcement of Sharia Act, 1991, according to which ‘Laws [are] to be interpreted in the light of Sharia, and ‘The State shall take adequate measures for the Islamisation of the judicial system.’

Finally — although this list doesn’t approach exhausting the influence of Islam in British society — in addition to these organisations there exists within Britain a terrorist arm with links to the Muslim Brotherhood. This is a transnational Sunni Muslim organisation that was founded in Egypt in 1928 to promote Islam and Sharia Law.

Fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood known to be currently operating in Britain include the Cambridge Education and Training Center Ltd., IMA6INE Ltd., Wembley Tree Ltd., Waslaforall, Future Graduates Ltd., Yas for Investment and Real Estate, Holdco UK Properties Limited and Nafel Capital Partners, all of which have recently been proscribed by the United Arab Emirates as terrorist groups. Indeed, most of the organisations I’ve listed here are linked by varying degrees of separation to the Muslim Council of Britain and the Muslim Association of Britain, which themselves have links to the Muslim Brotherhood.

It is a measure of how far Britain’s Islamisation has advanced that this organisation operates freely in the UK while being banned as a terrorist organisation in many Muslim countries, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, Jordan, Kenya, Bahrain, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and the United Arab Emirates, as well as in Russia.

Extraordinarily, in January 2026 the UAE announced that it was excluding UK universities from its approved list for state scholarships, citing the risk of Emirati citizens being radicalised by the Muslim Brotherhood operatng on British campuses. Universities where networks linked to the Muslim Brotherhood are reported to operate include the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) at the University of London, Queen Mary University of London, the University of Birmingham, the University of Manchester, the University of Leeds, the University of Bradford and the University of Newcastle. The same month, the US Department of State proscribed chapters of the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt, Lebanon and Palestine as designated terrorist organisations.

And there are consequences to harbouring and funding Islamic terrorists in the very country against which they launch their attacks. Six years ago, in 2020, there were 43,000 people on MI5’s terrorist watch list. After the mass migration of half a million Muslims to Britain and more than two-and-a-half years of weekly protests against the war in Gaza, the numbers can only have grown since then.

In 2024, Islamic terrorists accounted for 80% of UK police force’s counter-terror caseload. As of 31 March that year, 63% of prisoners in the UK arrested on terrorist-related charges were Islamic terrorists. Muslims have been responsible for 94% of all terrorism deaths, and 88% of terrorism-inflicted injuries, in Britain over the last 25 years. In the last 10 years, the percentages are even higher. One would never guess it from the relentless references to the threat from the mythical ‘far-Right’ by the UK Government and media, but MI5 today lists Islamic terrorism as ‘the most significant threat to the UK by volume’.

As anyone who has lived in Britain since 9/11 knows, this hasn’t happened overnight, and we have repeatedly ignored every warning to the contrary, as we continue to do today. In 2006, when the UK was led by the New Labour Government of Tony Blair and net migration to Britain had increased to over a quarter a million a year, the think-tank, Policy Exchange, published a report titled ‘When Progressives Treat With Reactionaries’, in which it argued that the British Foreign Office had already, in effect, become a front for The Muslim Brotherhood. Twenty years later, they have been proven right. Today, the UK is run by Muslims.

Extract from my new book, The Great Replacement and the Islamisation of Britain. If you want to know just how far down the path to becoming an Islamic State Britain is, and what we, the British people, can do to stop it, please consider purchasing a copy of my book. The link is below.



 Por falta de tiempo, falta traducción, y tal vez huelga. Pero faltan comentarios y confío en que los lectores de este lugar no los escatimen.


martes, 31 de marzo de 2026

William H. Riddell (1880-1946) cazador y pintor


Artículo en La Voz de Cádiz, 14 de Marzo, 2026:


Aves en la laguna de Jeli. (La Voz de Cádiz)


Apéndice por el Marqués de Tamarón


Recuerdo con sorprendente claridad un rato que pasé con mi tío abuelo Bill Riddell, cuando tenía cuatro años. Estábamos sentados en sillas de enea, en el patio del castillo de Arcos, y él, con sus modestos conocimientos de español, me explicó algunas de sus acuarelas que tenía a mano.
   Él murió pocos meses después, bastantes de sus pinturas quedan en la familia.  

   Y viene al caso otra pintura de esa época. El niño con cara malhumorada soy yo, pintado por otro tío mio, Beltrán Domeq González, en la playa de La Barrosa.

jueves, 19 de marzo de 2026

Tres libros para tres Reyes (I): ‘Liberales reaccionarios’

Artículo en La Iberia, escrito por Esperanza Ruiz.


El Marqués de Tamarón llevaba un tiempo enfrascado en la tarea de «cazar» pensadores, escritores que encajaran en su definición. 

ESPERANZA RUIZ – 1 de Enero de 2026



Debo reconocer que cuando Santiago de Mora-Figueroa me habló por primera vez del concepto que da título a su último libro, levanté una ceja. El marqués de Tamarón llevaba un tiempo enfrascado en la tarea de «cazar» pensadores, escritores —¡personajes históricos!— que encajaran en su definición. Tenía ya una lista solvente encabezada por José Ortega y Gasset, arquetipo de la cosa.

«¡Tú misma eres liberal reaccionaria!» —me espetó por teléfono. Y eso sí que no. Una no es muy amiga de las etiquetas pero comparto el análisis de Adriano Erriguel en Blasfemar en el Templo (Ediciones Monóculo) cuando explica que el liberalismo moderno (especialmente su versión neoliberal dominante) y el conservadurismo tradicional no encajan sin tensiones serias. Para el autor mexicano el liberal-conservadurismo no es más que una construcción histórica contingente, una alianza pragmática que nace cuando ambos bloques se alían durante la Guerra Fría contra el comunismo.

Sin embargo dicha asociación fue más táctica que ideológica: no surgió de una síntesis coherente entre ambas filosofías, sino de una fusión circunstancialEn su opinión, el liberal conservadurismo es un «ensamblaje forzado» que intenta casar dos lógicas distintas sin resolver sus contradicciones esenciales. Éstas serían: la emancipación individual, el cambio constante, sin límites, basado en la expansión del mercado y la ruptura de tradiciones versus la preservación de lo permanente, lo cual requiere cotos  y contención frente al cambio.

Liberales reaccionarios

Por tanto, ¿pretende Tamarón provocar con semejante título? Pues, un poquito. Pero sobre todo, a don Santiago le gusta jugar. Y juega haciendo trampas, que es la única manera de divertirse jugando. Liberales reaccionarios comienza con una aclaración en la que el marqués ser sirve de los contornos de la definición del Diccionario de la Lengua Castellana de 1780 para arrimar el ascua liberal a su sardina. Lean, si no, la definición de la discordia: «Generoso, bizarro y que sin fin particular ni tocar en el extremo de prodigalidad, graciosamente da y socorre, no sólo a los menesterosos, sino á los que no lo son tanto, haciéndoles todo bien».

Sobre los reaccionarios (término que a lo largo del libro irá alternando y asimilando con el de «conservador» a conveniencia) nos explica que, en su origen, «era uno que no tenía ganas de que los revolucionarios franceses le cortaran la cabeza». Estas líneas bastan para aclarar que no estamos ante un tratado de filosofía política. Son, en todo caso, una promesa de disfrute que se cumplirá con creces al finalizar la lectura.

Aún así, a Tamarón no le acaban de caer bien del todo los reaccionarios y, a regañadientes y haciendo uso de su liberalidad, trae a uno de sus más ilustres, Gómez Dávila, para darles algo de crédito. El escritor colombiano dice que el reaccionario no escribe para convencer. Sino que meramente transmite a sus futuros cómplices el legajo de un pleito sagrado. El lector advertirá pronto que las categorías no están para fijar límites, sino para desplazarlos; y que Tamarón no clasifica tanto como invita a acompañarle en el recorrido.

El marqués de Tamarón, en ocasiones, se reconoce como uno de los liberales-reaccionarios a los que pone bajo la lupa pero, cuando no le conviene el asunto, hace mutis por el foro o, lo que es lo mismo, abandona el plural mayestático. Y eso nos hace toda la gracia. Porque, el último libro publicado del otrora director del Instituto Cervantes es ecléctico —«soberanamente ecléctico» como califica él a Schopenhauer— pero la nota común a todos los capítulos es el humor.  Cada texto del marqués está atravesado por una deliciosa y suave ironía. Ese eclecticismo, tan gozoso como deliberado, exige también un lector dispuesto a perder el hilo para ganar matices.

En esta obra ha reunido algunas entradas de su blog —él prefiere el castellano «bitácora»—, artículos publicados en Ideas, el suplemento cultural de La Gaceta, entrevistas que le han realizado, o cuestionarios que él ha propuesto a algunos personajes. A modo de ejemplo, dedica una sección a recopilar los libros más sobrevalorados y otros injustamente menospreciados según las opiniones de un buen puñado de amigos. A saber: Fernando Sánchez Dragó, Álvaro Delgado Gal, Amando de Miguel, Carmen Posadas, José María Beneyto, Inocencio Arias o nuestra añorada Julia Escobar.

No importa tanto que Santiago hable de san Jerónimo, Erasmo de Rotterdam, el rey Salomón o Wittgenstein, lo fundamental en Liberales Reaccionarios es la erudición con una inclinación maravillosa a la anécdota y a la sonrisa.

Santiago de Mora Figueroa escribe en el otoño de la varonil edad, como dice Baltasar Gracián, con plena lucidez, generosidad y con esa pasmosa ligereza de los hombres sabios que sabemos irrepetibles. Que reconocemos como representantes del fin de una época y por ello debemos prestarles máxima atención.

La obra ha sido autopublicada en Amazon por una razón de peso: don Santiago no quiere vérselas con editores que le sugieran adoptar moderneces de la RAE. No sólo ha conseguido así que su impecable gramática haya quedado a salvo de injerencias, sino que la maquetación del libro, en el que se reproducen fotografías y obras de arte que ilustran los textos, es inmejorable.

***

Gracias, querida Esperanza, una vez más, Nomen est omen. Da gusto comprobar que tu nombre es presagio de generosidad y prueba de que eres liberal y reaccionaria. 




jueves, 12 de marzo de 2026

"El genio de verso y cántico cuya vida fue como el Libro de Job"

 

Me permito reproducir un artículo de Paul Johnson (1928-2023) sobre Cole Porter (1891-1964). Lo hago con ciertos reparos pues no tengo ganas ni tiempo para traducirlo del inglés al español. Su autor fue un burgués británico ultra izquierdista (educado por los Jesuitas en Stonyhurst) que al final volvió a la razón burguesa y se permitió reconocer sus gustos muy ajenos a la dictadura del proletariado. Cole Porter desde luego nunca fue progre. Pero todas esas disquisiciones palidecen al lado del gracejo rayano en la Gracia que el inglés apreció escuchando al americano, y en particular las letras de sus canciones. 
Tal vez el inglés no llegó a conocer el largo calvario de la vida del americano. Las largas enfermedades de Cole Porter fueron una pesadilla. Pero él las afrontó con valor y resignación.

Fotografía de Paul Johnson, en el artículo de The Guardian, 13 Enero 2023


The genius of verse and song whose life was a Book of Job

 

As a former treble chorister — you should have heard my ‘Benedictus’ solo from Gounod’s Messe du Sacré Coeur! — I love singing, especially popular ditties. I sing to my latest granddaughter, Daisy, that clever song ‘Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer do’. She cannot talk yet but is almost walking, and she wriggles to it rhythmically, so I call her the Cairo belly-dancer. The period 1880 to 1914 was the first golden age of popular songs, most of them British, the best of which my mother used to sing to me when I was tiny. I used to know all the words of ‘Alexander’s Ragtime Band’, though that of course was an American song, written and composed by Irving Berlin, born in Russia as Israel Baline, who became Berlin after a misprint in his first published score. Berlin, I gather, was not a likeable character (mean) and not much of a musician either, though the son of a cantor; he could not read music and could play the piano only in F sharp. But he wrote 1,500 songs, compared with Schubert’s 600, and they included more hits than anyone else created. I don’t like them much: ‘There’s no business like showbusiness’ strikes me as typically stagey self-indulgence, and ‘Anything you can do’ is smart-alec amphigory. 

The writer-composer I really like is Cole Porter. Indeed, with the possible exception of Noël Coward (and Tom Moore), he is the head of his class. The two men were very different. Coward was lower-middle-class, like Moore, and never forgot that his aim in life was to succeed and enjoy it. He was a happy man, I think, on the whole, and certainly gave that impression when you saw him. Porter came from wealth: his mother was a Cole, a hugely rich family, and he married another heiress. He was always inheriting money, and when he was a young man he could rent the Ca’Rezzonico in Venice and hire barges and import bands to entertain his chums. He first tasted success as a brilliant amateur at Yale, but he took the trouble to get himself a proper musical education, and there was nothing he did not know about the technical arcana of his difficult, dodgy craft. 

Porter was the kind of artist I most like and respect: one who takes infinite trouble to hone and perfect his skills, and is always humble and anxious to learn. He had in youth an extraordinary gift for verse, for rhymes and rhymes within lines. He was so greedy for words that he literally wore out dictionaries by endlessly rooting through them. (The only other writers I have known who did this were Evelyn Waugh and Kingsley Amis: the latter told me he needed a new Oxford Pocket every three years.) Porter loved Roget and Fowler, and he kept handy every rhyming dictionary he could find. He wrote down lists of words and rhymes he wanted to use, rather like W.S. Landor and Walter Pater. His lyrics and the tunes he wrote for them can be extraordinarily complicated and unusual, triplet figures within duple metres, for example, and chromatic devices of daunting and dazzling bravura. ‘Let’s do it’ and ‘What is this thing called love?’ are pretty weird in conception even before you begin to examine the lyrics. Porter’s mentor in verse was, of course, Gilbert, but as a musician he turned to Schubert and Schumann, even Brahms, and composed on an art-song scale — ‘Begin the Beguine’ is 108 bars, before any repeat. 

What I admire about such songs as ‘Night and Day’, ‘You’re the Top’, ‘It’s De-Lovely’ and ‘Just one of those things’ is that Porter took a good deal of trouble to ensure that listeners heard every word. And he had the backing of producers who shared his passion for articulation and audibility. When Louis B. Mayer was running MGM in the Thirties, and it put out the best Hollywood musicals ever filmed, he would go to great expense to compile try-out movies from the rushes and show them in cinemas where audiences, on leaving, were questioned about the words. One of my complaints against pop songs is that you cannot hear the words, partly of course because the singers are often barely literate and do not speak standard English. 

Porter and similar creators were helped by the fact that the first half of the 20th century saw the theatre and the studios at their meticulous and stupendous best, before unions and restrictive practices destroyed quality (I once heard an indignant Groucho Marx hold forth on this topic). Peter Pan was an instant success, and has remained so ever since because the original London production at the Duke of York’s in December 1904 was put on with absolutely no expense spared in cast, rehearsal time, stage machinery and technical innovations — otherwise it would not have worked and would now be completely forgotten. When Porter’s Born to Dance was filmed in 1936, the combined stages were made 200 feet long, 100 high and 80 deep to hold the 300 dancers, filmed by 75 cameramen. The costumes by Adrian required 150 wardrobe workers and titivators, while the sets were the work of 1,000 carpenters, painters and scaffolders, plus 50 cleaner-polishers. In addition there were 125 electricians, 100 people in make-up and 25 prop-men. 

I suppose a similar conscientiousness and perfectionism were displayed in the world of painting, especially in Italy and the Low Countries in the two centuries 1450 to 1650, and have never been demonstrated since, to our loss and the loss of art. Once we used our fingers and hands, limbs and voices, eyes and ears with a trained professionalism built up over countless generations (the earliest musical pipe to survive is 70,000 years old). Today we rest our bodies more and more, using our brains to conceive and direct the machines which plod and push and carry, and increasingly take on the skilled work too. Amplification has inflicted long-term artistic injury on singing, just as computers are destroying calligraphy, and our eyesight atrophies under the impact of visual mechanics. Recently large parts of the West End reeled with the impact of thunderous rock music generated by a vast noise-box in Hyde Park. Why the royal parks should promote this kind of nuisance to London residents is not obvious, though I suppose greed is, as usual, the explanation. But it occurred to me that the genius of a Cole Porter could contribute nothing to such an occasion, since words were silenced by decibels. Rock music is the single most blatant stigma of the death of civilisation that we are witnessing. 

Porter’s own death was pitiful. It is gruesomely described in the fine biography of him published by William McBrien eight years ago. Porter said he composed best on horseback, and it was a fall from a horse which destroyed what little happiness he enjoyed in the intervals of his chronic depressions. As with Henry VIII, the blow led to a chronic case of osteomyelitis with increasing pain. But whereas horrible old Henry could take it out on wives, ministers etc. with the headsman’s axe, poor little Porter, after two decades of agony, had to submit to amputation (which in turn aggravated his despair and dependence on alcohol), frequent hospitalisation and operations, ending in delirium tremens and death. Terrible to think that an artist who gave (and gives) such pleasure should meet so spectral an end. But Porter had been much blessed with talent and worldly goods, and as Job said, ‘The Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away. Blessed be the name of the Lord.’

WRITTEN BY Paul Johnson, The Spectator , 26 July, 2006


(Artículo que me ha facilitado Joaquín Torrente)