Ludwig van Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 in D minor (1824)

Beethoven’s Ninth (Sym­pho­ny No. 9 in D minor) was his last com­plete sym­pho­ny but it also hap­pens to be regard­ed by many musi­col­o­gists as his great­est work and one of the supreme achieve­ments in the his­to­ry of music. Not bad for a last major work, con­sid­er­ing how many artists gen­er­al­ly peak at some point ear­li­er in their careers and tail off some­what towards the end. It was com­posed between 1822 and 1824 and was the first exam­ple of a major com­pos­er using voic­es in a sym­pho­ny. The final move­ment fea­tures four vocal soloists and a cho­rus, with words adapt­ed from the poem by Friedrich Schiller, Ode to Joy (lend­ing the tune its famous com­mon name).

There are a num­ber of anec­dotes about the pre­miere of the Ninth, at the The­ater am Kärnt­ner­tor in Vien­na on the 7th May 1824, based on the tes­ti­mo­ny of some of the par­tic­i­pants. There are sug­ges­tions that it was under-rehearsed and a bit scrap­py, but regard­less it was an enor­mous suc­cess. In any case, Beethoven was not to blame, since he was by now deaf and although he was osten­si­bly con­duct­ing so as to be present for the audi­ence, it was actu­al­ly co-con­duc­tor Louis Duport whose baton was fol­lowed by the musi­cians. Vio­lin­ist Joseph Böhm recalled:

“[Beethoven] stood in front of a con­duc­tor’s stand and threw him­self back and forth like a mad­man. At one moment he stretched to his full height, at the next he crouched down to the floor, he flailed about with his hands and feet as though he want­ed to play all the instru­ments and sing all the cho­rus parts.”

When the audi­ence applaud­ed Beethoven was sev­er­al bars off and still con­duct­ing, so con­tral­to Car­o­line Unger walked over and turned Beethoven around to accept the audi­ence’s applause. Accord­ing to the crit­ic for the The­ater-Zeitung, “the pub­lic received the musi­cal hero with the utmost respect and sym­pa­thy, lis­tened to his won­der­ful, gigan­tic cre­ations with the most absorbed atten­tion and broke out in jubi­lant applause.” The audi­ence gave him five stand­ing ova­tions; there were hand­ker­chiefs and hats in the air, and raised hands, so that Beethoven, who they knew could not hear the applause, could at least see the ova­tions.

Here’s an excerpt from the Ode to Joy played by the Chica­go Sym­pho­ny Orches­tra.

Lud­wig van Beethoven

Oliver Postgate’s Noggin The Nog (1959)

Per­sons of a cer­tain age (and per­haps per­sons of any age, giv­en the endur­ing pop­u­lar­i­ty of his cre­ations) will remem­ber with affec­tion the voice of ani­ma­tor and pup­peteer Oliv­er Post­gate (1925–2008). He was the cre­ator, writer and nar­ra­tor of such pop­u­lar and charm­ing children’s TV pro­grammes as Bag­puss, Nog­gin the Nog, Ivor the Engine, Clangers and Pogles’ Wood. All these shows were made by Small­films, the com­pa­ny he set up in 1959 with col­lab­o­ra­tor, artist and pup­pet mak­er Peter Firmin, in a dis­used cow­shed near Peter’s home in Blean near Can­ter­bury.

They were a great team: Post­gate came up with the con­cepts, wrote the scripts and did the stop motion film­ing whilst Firmin did the art­work and built the mod­els. As Post­gate voiced so many of the pro­duc­tions, his dis­tinc­tive voice became famil­iar to gen­er­a­tions of chil­dren. Small­films was able to pro­duce two min­utes of TV-ready film per day, which was many times more than a con­ven­tion­al stop motion ani­ma­tion stu­dio of the time, with Post­gate mov­ing the (orig­i­nal­ly card­board) char­ac­ters him­self, and work­ing his 16mm cam­era frame-by-frame with a home-made click­er.

They began in 1959 with Ivor the Engine, a series for ITV about a Welsh steam loco­mo­tive who want­ed to sing in a choir, and fol­lowed it up, also in 1959, with Nog­gin the Nog, their first pro­duc­tion for the BBC. These two pro­grammes estab­lished Small­films as a safe pair of hands to pro­duce chil­dren’s enter­tain­ment and they went on to pro­duce mate­r­i­al for the BBC right up to the 1980s. Every­one will have their favourite (in a 1999 BBC poll Bag­puss was vot­ed the most pop­u­lar chil­dren’s TV pro­gramme of all time) and for me it was Nog­gin the Nog.

The sto­ries were based around the cen­tral char­ac­ter of Nog­gin, the good-natured son of Knut, King of the Nogs, and his queen Grun­hil­da. When King Knut dies, Nog­gin meets and mar­ries Princess Nooka of the Nooks, and becomes the new king, at the expense of arch-vil­lain Nog­bad the Bad, who is for­ev­er try­ing to claim Noggin’s throne for him­self. Oth­er char­ac­ters includ­ed lazy Cap­tain of the Roy­al Guard Thornog­son, eccen­tric inven­tor Olaf the Lofty, and Grac­u­lus, a big green bird. The names and themes are very Scan­di­na­vian and saga-tinged and Post­gate must have been very famil­iar with the Nordic folk­loric tales of old such as the Ice­landic Eddas, but of course it’s children’s TV so it’s all just won­der­ful­ly made-up fun.

The pair brought in com­pos­er Ver­non Elliott to cre­ate atmos­pher­ic musi­cal sketch­es for the pro­grammes and he did so with great effect using the bas­soon, harp, glock­en­spiel and, in the case of the Clangers’ dis­tinc­tive voic­es, the swa­nee whis­tle. Speak­ing of Clangers, Firmin once said that the show’s sur­re­al­ism had led to accu­sa­tions that Post­gate was tak­ing hal­lu­cino­genic drugs: “Peo­ple used to say, ‘Ooh, what’s Oliv­er on, with all of these weird ideas?’ And we used to say, ‘He’s on cups of tea and bis­cuits’ ”. So very British!

Enjoy this nos­tal­gic selec­tion of open­ing seg­ments from Nog­gin the Nog, Clangers, and that “sag­gy, old cloth cat, bag­gy, and a bit loose at the seams”, Bag­puss

Oliv­er Post­gate and Peter Firmin

P G Wodehouse’s Carry On, Jeeves (1925)

PG (Sir Pel­ham Grenville) Wode­house (1881–1975) was an Eng­lish author who was one of the most wide­ly read humourists of the 20th cen­tu­ry. A pro­lif­ic writer through­out his life, Wode­house pub­lished more than nine­ty books and would often have two or more books on the go at any one time. His prose style and sub­ject mat­ter was light and breezy and, in his own words, he want­ed to spread “sweet­ness and light”. Just look at those titles: Noth­ing Seri­ous, Laugh­ing Gas, Joy in the Morn­ing. With every sparkling joke, every gen­tly inno­cent char­ac­ter, and every far­ci­cal tus­sle, all set in an ide­alised world of the 1920s and 30s, Wode­house whisks us far away from our wor­ries.

He had many fans among the great and the good, includ­ing for­mer British prime min­is­ters and many of his fel­low writ­ers such as George Orwell and Eve­lyn Waugh; I seem to remem­ber read­ing that Lem­my of Motor­head used to read him on his tour bus, post-gig! Although Wode­house wrote sev­er­al series of books about var­i­ous char­ac­ters such as the Bland­ings Cas­tle set, the unruf­flable mon­o­cle-wear­ing Old Eton­ian Psmith (with a silent P), and the tall-tale-telling Mr Mulliner, most peo­ple will know him for the com­ic cre­ations, Jeeves and Woost­er.

Bertie Woost­er is the mon­eyed young toff who cares lit­tle about any­thing oth­er than fash­ion­able socks, frip­pery, and top­hole soci­etal high jinks, whilst Jeeves is the saga­cious valet who clear­ly has the brains that Bertie lacks and who steers his mas­ter through many a social storm. The Jeeves canon con­sists of 35 short sto­ries and 11 nov­els, and a won­der­ful start­ing point is 1925’s col­lec­tion of ten short sto­ries, Car­ry On, Jeeves.

My own intro­duc­tion to Wode­house, like many peo­ple, was the 1990s TV series Jeeves and Woost­er, with Hugh Lau­rie as Bertie and Stephen Fry as Jeeves. Jeeves and Woost­er was a week­ly escape into a jazz-age won­der­land of art-deco apart­ments, pan­elled gentlemen’s clubs, “tis­sue-restor­ing” cock­tails and buf­fet break­fasts, all serv­ing as a back­drop to a series of predica­ments for Bertie from which he would invari­ably be extri­cat­ed by Jeeves. The dra­ma was always held togeth­er by fizzing dia­logue, pep­pered with bons mots and not a few neol­o­gisms from Wodehouse’s pen.

As befit­ting a man whose char­ac­ters and sit­u­a­tions had such light­ness of being, Wode­house didn’t take him­self too seri­ous­ly either, as this rejoin­der to a crit­ic below shows:

A cer­tain crit­ic — for such men, I regret to say, do exist — made the nasty remark about my last nov­el that it con­tained ‘all the old Wode­house char­ac­ters under dif­fer­ent names’…he will not be able to make a sim­i­lar charge against Sum­mer Light­ning. With my supe­ri­or intel­li­gence, I have out-gen­er­alled the man this time by putting in all the old Wode­house char­ac­ters under the same names. Pret­ty sil­ly it will make him feel, I rather fan­cy.”

Here’s a typ­i­cal scene from the TV series where­in Bertie finds him­self embroiled in a secret love tri­an­gle in high dan­ger of immi­nent expo­sure and it’s down to Jeeves to pull off a suit­ably clever res­cue.

P G Wode­house

Will Ferrell in Elf (2003)

Any­one seen Elf again recent­ly? I have, and although I came late to the par­ty, some years after its 2003 release, it’s a Christ­mas sta­ple in our house. It’s just a joy to watch, with great per­for­mances from Will Fer­rell as Bud­dy the human-who-thinks-he’s‑an-elf, and a strong sup­port­ing cast includ­ing James Caan and Zooey Deschanel (great comedic actress lat­er to star in Amer­i­can sit­com New Girl). It’s just a charm­ing, sil­ly fam­i­ly film but a sub­lime­ly-made charm­ing, sil­ly fam­i­ly film. The direc­tor was Jon Favreau, who is known for films as diverse as rom­com, musi­cal dra­ma, adven­ture and sci-fi, and includ­ing sev­er­al of the Mar­vel Stu­dios movies.

The first script for Elf was writ­ten way back in 1993 by Amer­i­can screen­writer David Beren­baum, with Jim Car­rey in mind to play Bud­dy. How­ev­er, as the project took years to get off the ground, Car­rey went on instead to pro­duce that oth­er fes­tive favourite in 2000’s How The Grinch Stole Christ­mas, and Will Far­rell joined the project instead. If you haven’t seen it, it’s about a human baby, inad­ver­tent­ly brought back to the North Pole in Santa’s sack, who is brought up as an elf, and who lat­er tracks down his bio­log­i­cal father in New York. As an “inno­cent abroad”, there is none so inno­cent as this.

While you might assume that a lot of com­put­er trick­ery was employed to make Will Fer­rell look big­ger than his fel­low actors in the North Pole, Jon Favreau favoured cam­era tech­niques and trick­ery to cre­ate the illu­sion. He used the con­cept of “forced per­spec­tive”, along with the build­ing of two sets, one small­er than the oth­er, with one raised clos­er and small­er and one big­ger and fur­ther away. With the two sets mea­sured and lined up, the direc­tor could have one per­son on one set appear to be much larg­er than a per­son on the oth­er set. The only CGI in the film was some snow­ing.

The scene with Peter Din­klage is riotous­ly fun­ny, and is best viewed with­out food or drink in your mouth. The scene is set in the board­room of the children’s book pub­lish­ing house that Buddy’s father works for, under pres­sure to come up with the next best-sell­er. Din­klage plays a paid exter­nal children’s book wun­derkind come to bail out the com­pa­ny with his great ideas. Dinklage’s char­ac­ter, like Din­klage him­self, has dwarfism and the jux­ta­po­si­tion of inno­cence and offence that ensues, when Bud­dy enters the room and thinks he is see­ing an actu­al elf, is bril­liant. For the view­ing audi­ence it is a case of see­ing both sides…and it’s very, very fun­ny, so Mer­ry Christ­mas!

Will Fer­rell as Bud­dy the Elf

 

HG Wells’s The War Of The Worlds (1898)

HG (Her­bert George) Wells (1866–1946) was a pro­lif­ic writer with more than fifty nov­els and dozens of short sto­ries to his name. His out­put was an eclec­tic mix, includ­ing works of social com­men­tary, pol­i­tics, his­to­ry, pop­u­lar sci­ence, satire, biog­ra­phy, and futur­ism (he fore­saw the advent of air­craft, tanks, space trav­el, nuclear weapons, satel­lite tele­vi­sion and some­thing akin to the World Wide Web) – but of course what he is best remem­bered for is his sci­ence fic­tion, fol­low­ing the remark­able rapid-fire pub­li­ca­tion over a four-year peri­od of instant clas­sics The Time Machine (1895), The Island of Doc­tor More­au (1896), The Invis­i­ble Man (1897), and The War of the Worlds (1898).

The War of the Worlds is one of the ear­li­est sto­ries to detail a con­flict between mankind and an extra-ter­res­tri­al race. It presents itself as a fac­tu­al account of a Mar­t­ian inva­sion as wit­nessed by the nar­ra­tor. You know the plot: appar­ent mete­ors have rained down around the narrator’s home town of Wok­ing (through which I trav­elled by train recent­ly, prompt­ing me to make a men­tal note to write this very blog), but which of course turn out to be far from inor­gan­ic space rock, but instead very much not-friend­ly space aliens bent on destroy­ing human­i­ty.

The first edi­tion was illus­trat­ed by British artist War­wick Gob­le: inky, black-and-white depic­tions that were eerie, imag­i­na­tive, excit­ing, and thor­ough­ly of their late Vic­to­ri­an time. Lat­er, in 1906, the French edi­tions were illus­trat­ed by the Brazil­ian artist Hen­rique Alvim Cor­rêa, which turned out to be some­thing of an upgrade, adding to the evo­ca­tion of Wells’ imag­ined crea­tures and their ves­sels, and of which Wells him­self might­i­ly approved.

The War of the Worlds has spawned half a dozen fea­ture films and tele­vi­sion series, a record album and musi­cal show (Jeff Wayne, of course), but per­haps the most impact­ful drama­ti­sa­tion came in the 1938 radio pro­gramme direct­ed by and star­ring Orson Welles. It was very much played for real and if you hap­pened to miss the intro­duc­to­ry mono­logue – which thou­sands of lis­ten­ers did – you could be for­giv­en for think­ing the dra­ma was a live news­cast of devel­op­ing events. The pro­gramme famous­ly cre­at­ed wide­spread pan­ic with hordes of peo­ple believ­ing that  a real-life Mar­t­ian inva­sion was under­way right then in North Amer­i­ca (Welles had swapped out Wok­ing for Grover’s Mill, New Jer­sey). It’s easy to scoff at the mass cred­u­lous­ness of the pub­lic, but you decide: here’s a clip of the broad­cast. Might you have believed it, too?

HG Wells

Jacques-Louis David’s Oath Of The Horatii (1784)

A gen­er­a­tion or two before the Impres­sion­ists, French artists didn’t have the lux­u­ry of lolling about fields paint­ing haystacks and gen­er­al­ly hav­ing a wheeze of a time. At a time of seis­mic social and polit­i­cal change, an artist had to box clever to stay on the right side of dan­ger­ous polit­i­cal forces. Jacques-Louis David (1748–1825) was one such painter who man­aged to suc­cess­ful­ly nav­i­gate his way — and his art — from the final years of the Ancien Régime through the French Rev­o­lu­tion and the rise and fall of Napoleon.

David was con­sid­ered to be the pre­em­i­nent painter of the Neo­clas­si­cal era, that return to the high-mind­ed sever­i­ty of the arts of ancient Greece and Rome in con­trast to the friv­o­li­ty of the late Baroque. David’s his­to­ry paint­ing matched the moral cli­mate of the final years of Louis XVI and he was favoured by the Court. How­ev­er, David lat­er became an active sup­port­er of the French Rev­o­lu­tion and friend of Robe­spierre, and his Death of Marat (1793) became one of the most famous images of the era.

Impris­oned briefly after Robe­spier­re’s fall from pow­er, he aligned him­self with yet anoth­er polit­i­cal regime upon his release: that of Napoleon, the First Con­sul of France. As well as his suit­ably hero­ic ren­der­ing of Napoleon in his Napoleon at the Saint-Bernard Pass (1801), he also cre­at­ed the mon­u­men­tal The Coro­na­tion of Napoleon (1806). Final­ly, after Napoleon’s fall from pow­er and the Bour­bon revival, David exiled him­self to Brus­sels, where he remained until his death.

How­ev­er, let’s return to David’s ori­gins with a paint­ing con­sid­ered a Neo­clas­si­cal mas­ter­piece, Oath of the Hor­atii (1784). It depicts a scene from a Roman leg­end about a sev­enth-cen­tu­ry BC dis­pute between two war­ring cities, Rome and Alba Lon­ga. Instead of the two cities send­ing their armies to war, they agree to choose three men from each city; the vic­tor in that fight will be the vic­to­ri­ous city. From Rome, three broth­ers from a Roman fam­i­ly, the Hor­atii, agree to fight three broth­ers from a fam­i­ly of Alba Lon­ga, the Curi­atii.

The three Hor­atii broth­ers, will­ing to sac­ri­fice their lives for the good of Rome, are shown salut­ing their father who holds their swords out for them. There could be no more evoca­tive a scene of patri­ot­ic duty and, although paint­ed four years before the Rev­o­lu­tion, it nonethe­less became a sym­bol of loy­al­ty to State and a defin­ing image of the time.

Of the three Hor­atii broth­ers, only one will sur­vive the con­fronta­tion and he will kill each Curi­atii broth­er in turn, seiz­ing vic­to­ry for Rome. Aside from the three broth­ers depict­ed, David also rep­re­sents, in the bot­tom right cor­ner, a woman cry­ing. She is Camil­la, a sis­ter of the Hor­atii, who hap­pens to be also betrothed to one of the Curi­atii fight­ers, and thus she weeps in the real­i­sa­tion that, what­ev­er hap­pens, she will lose some­one she loves.

Eric Satie’s Gymnopédie No. 1 (1888)

Pret­ty much all of the clas­si­cal com­posers I have writ­ten about in this blog so far (let’s see: Brahms, Mozart, Chopin, Mendelssohn, to name but a few) were pro­lif­ic and com­plex and not­ed for being child prodi­gies for whom an upward musi­cal tra­jec­to­ry was clear­ly in the off­ing. Not so this week’s enig­mat­ic com­pos­er, Eric Satie (1866–1925). The son of a French father and a Scot­tish moth­er, Satie stud­ied at the Paris Con­ser­va­toire, but was an undis­tin­guished stu­dent and left with­out even obtain­ing a diplo­ma (one tutor described his piano tech­nique as “insignif­i­cant and worth­less”; they did­n’t hold back in those days), work­ing through­out the 1880s as a pianist in café-cabaret in Mont­martre, Paris. At this time, how­ev­er, he would begin com­pos­ing works, most­ly for solo piano such as his Gymnopédies and Gnossi­ennes, that would pro­pel him to an unan­tic­i­pat­ed renown.

Satie famous­ly employed a min­i­mal­ist, pared back style of music in con­trast to the grand and epic com­po­si­tions of a Wag­n­er, for exam­ple.  In fact, he would influ­ence a whole new gen­er­a­tion of French com­posers away from post-Wag­ner­ian impres­sion­ism and towards a spar­er, ters­er style. Among those influ­enced by him dur­ing his life­time were Mau­rice Rav­el (see his Boléro, for exam­ple) and he is seen as an influ­ence on more recent, min­i­mal­ist com­posers such as John Cage and Arvo Pärt.

Satie was an enig­ma, for sure, and some­thing of a quirky char­ac­ter. He gave some of his lat­er works absurd titles, such as Ver­i­ta­bles Pre­ludes flasques (pour un chien) (“True Flab­by Pre­ludes (for a Dog)”, 1912), and Cro­quis et agac­eries d’un gros bon­homme en bois (“Sketch­es and Exas­per­a­tions of a Big Wood­en Man”, 1913). He nev­er mar­ried, and his home for most of his adult life was a sin­gle small room, first in Mont­martre and lat­er in Arcueil. He adopt­ed var­i­ous images over the years, includ­ing a peri­od in qua­si-priest­ly garb, anoth­er in which he always wore iden­ti­cal­ly coloured vel­vet suits, and anoth­er, per­haps his most endur­ing per­sona, in which he wore a neat bour­geois cos­tume, with bowler hat, wing col­lar, and umbrel­la. He was a life­long heavy drinker, and died of cir­rho­sis of the liv­er at the age of 59.

If you think you don’t know Eric Satie’s music, think again, as you’re sure to recog­nise his Gymnopédie No. 1 that you can hear here against some footage of old Paris (I love these old videos, don’t you, dur­ing the advent of mov­ing pic­tures when passers-by would stare or glance at this strange new-fan­gled giz­mo point­ing at them, and seem­ing to con­nect, albeit briefly, with we the view­er well over a cen­tu­ry lat­er).

Eric Satie

 

 

Cat Stevens’ Tea For The Tillerman (1970)

One of the advan­tages of hav­ing old­er sis­ters in the ear­ly sev­en­ties when I was just start­ing to dis­cov­er music was the inher­i­tance from them of cer­tain clas­sic albums. In ret­ro­spect, I admire their gen­eros­i­ty, because it’s not every­one who relin­quish­es large parts of their music col­lec­tion to younger sib­lings (I’m not sure I would have, had I had any). Nonethe­less, I came to own and appre­ci­ate at a young age such sem­i­nal records as David Bowie’s The Rise and Fall of Zig­gy Star­dust and the Spi­ders of Mars, the Moody Blues’ In Search of the Lost Chord, and Led Zeppelin’s Led Zep­pelin II. Oh, and also three clas­sic albums by the sub­ject of today’s blog, Cat Stevens, name­ly Mona Bone Jakon, Tea for the Tiller­man, and Teas­er and the Fire­cat.

These three albums sprung out of what was an impres­sive­ly rich peri­od of out­put from Cat: in order, they had been released in April 1970, Novem­ber 1970 and Octo­ber 1971. Not that I knew the order of release back then – I wasn’t yet a geek – they were sim­ply records, but records chock-full of warm, catchy folk-pop, occa­sion­al­ly with a Greek tinge in homage to his part-Hel­lenic her­itage (his father was Cypri­ot, his moth­er Swedish, and Cat him­self – Steven Geor­giou — was born in Maryle­bone, Lon­don).

Songs that res­onat­ed: Kat­man­du from Mona Bone Jakon, a lilt­ing, mys­ti­cal acoustic song awash with flute from a 19-year-old Peter Gabriel, and a paean to all things sim­ple and peace­ful, a metaphor­ic Eden away from West­ern civil­i­sa­tion. Years lat­er I would be rid­ing a bus into the real Kath­man­du in Nepal with this track play­ing mean­ing­ful­ly on my Sony Walk­man.

From Teas­er and the Fire­cat: Peace Train, and its hope­ful, anti-war lyrics (Out on the edge of dark­ness, There rides a peace train, Oh peace train take this coun­try, Come take me home again). Ide­al­is­tic, sure, but it cer­tain­ly struck a chord with me at the time, and if you can’t be ide­al­is­tic as a young teenag­er, when can you be (the gim­let eye of expe­ri­ence hadn’t yet been acquired)?

And from Tea for the Tiller­man, the beau­ti­ful­ly craft­ed Father and Son, a poignant exchange between a father fail­ing to under­stand his son’s desire to break away, and the son strug­gling to artic­u­late the dri­ve he feels to seek his own des­tiny. I always had trav­el in my soul, and dreamt of tak­ing off into the wider world, so this spoke to me in vol­umes, even though I didn’t actu­al­ly have to deal with any such cul­tur­al mis­align­ments with my own dad.

After famous­ly con­vert­ing to Islam and chang­ing his name to Yusuf Islam in 1978, and drop­ping out of the spot­light for many years, Cat returned to pop music in 2006 and released an album of new pop songs (for the first time in 28 years), under the name Yusuf. In Sep­tem­ber 2020, and now under the com­bi­na­to­r­i­al name Yusuf/Cat Stevens, he released Tea for the Tiller­man 2, a reboot of the orig­i­nal to cel­e­brate its 50th anniver­sary.

Anoth­er great song from that album was Where Do The Chil­dren Play? and here is Cat play­ing a sim­ple acoustic ver­sion of it and prov­ing that he’s still got a voice like warm molasses. A shout out to my mate Gra­ham for send­ing me this and inspir­ing this week’s blog!

Cat Stevens

Patrick McGoohan as The Prisoner (1967)

Although I was too young at the time to watch the orig­i­nal 1967 air­ing of this British TV series, I guess it must have been re-run in the eight­ies or per­haps my friend Alec had it on video and shared it with me? What­ev­er, at some point in the eight­ies I dis­cov­ered The Pris­on­er and, hooked from episode one, I became, with Alec, a big fan. Here was a TV series that was not only enter­tain­ing but actu­al­ly made you think. Noth­ing was ever what it seemed, no-one had a real name, you nev­er knew who the good guys were and who the bad; it had a unique, sur­re­al vibe, and it incor­po­rat­ed ele­ments of sci­ence fic­tion, alle­go­ry, spy fic­tion and psy­cho­log­i­cal dra­ma.

The show was cre­at­ed while Patrick McGoohan and George Mark­stein were work­ing on spy dra­ma Dan­ger Man (fun fact: Ian Flem­ing worked in the devel­op­ment stage of Dan­ger Man, and its pro­tag­o­nist, played by McGoohan, announces him­self as “Drake…John Drake”). The exact details of who cre­at­ed which aspects of The Pris­on­er are dis­put­ed though major­i­ty opin­ion cred­its McGoohan as the sole cre­ator of the series, and it’s cer­tain­ly true that it was McGoohan who pitched the idea ver­bal­ly to sta­tion boss Lew Grade. One can only imag­ine the inner work­ings of Grade’s mind as the con­cept and plot were laid down for him; how­ev­er, he went with it and the project was born.

So, what was that plot? An unnamed British intel­li­gence agent is abduct­ed and wakes up in a mys­te­ri­ous coastal loca­tion known to its res­i­dents as the Vil­lage. His cap­tors des­ig­nate him as Num­ber Six and try to find out why he abrupt­ly resigned from his job, some­thing he stead­fast­ly refus­es to divulge. His chief antag­o­nist is styled Num­ber Two (and no, we nev­er sat­is­fac­to­ri­ly learn who is Num­ber One), the iden­ti­ty of whom changes with near­ly every episode, allow­ing a ros­ter of well-known six­ties’ actors, like Leo McK­ern, Anton Rodgers and Peter Wyn­garde, to play their part.

Most of the res­i­dents are pris­on­ers them­selves, while oth­ers are embed­ded as spies or guards. The Vil­lage is sur­round­ed by moun­tains on three sides and the sea on the oth­er, and any would-be escapees who make it out to sea are tracked by CCTV and recap­tured by Rover, a huge mobile translu­cent white bal­loon-thing. Every­one uses num­bers for iden­ti­fi­ca­tion, and most of the vil­lagers wear a stan­dard out­fit con­sist­ing of coloured blaz­ers, mul­ti­coloured capes, striped sweaters, and a vari­ety of head­wear such as straw boaters. They are gen­er­al­ly very polite, though that tends to make you very sus­pi­cious of them.

Catch­phras­es abound, and I remem­ber Alec and I glee­ful­ly repeat­ing them ad infini­tum: “I’m not a num­ber, I’m a free man!”, “Be see­ing you” and the glo­ri­ous­ly lib­er­tar­i­an “I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or num­bered!”. The lat­ter phrase I had embla­zoned on a t‑shirt bought from the gift shop at Port­meiri­on in North Wales, where The Pris­on­er was filmed and which I vis­it­ed on pil­grim­age in 1987.

Let’s enjoy the open­ing cred­its, enhanced by the excel­lent sound­track from Ron Grain­er.

Num­ber Six

 

Edwin Landseer’s The Monarch Of The Glen (1851)

Sir Edwin Land­seer (1802–1873) was a Lon­don-born painter and sculp­tor whose artis­tic tal­ents were recog­nised ear­ly on: at age thir­teen he exhib­it­ed works at the Roy­al Acad­e­my as an “Hon­orary Exhibitor” and was elect­ed as an Asso­ciate there at the min­i­mum age of twen­ty four. He was able to paint extreme­ly quick­ly and per­haps these days would have attract­ed a cool nick­name like snook­er play­ers Hur­ri­cane Hig­gins and Whirl­wind White (Light­ning Land­seer, per­haps); he was also reput­ed to be able to draw simul­ta­ne­ous­ly with both hands. One biog­ra­ph­er wrote:

…upon the occa­sion of a large par­ty assem­bled one evening at the house of a gen­tle­man in Lon­don, the con­ver­sa­tion hav­ing turned upon the sub­ject of feats of skill with the hand, one of the ladies present remarked that it would be impos­si­ble for any­one, how­ev­er skil­ful, to draw two things at once.
“Oh, I can do that,” said Land­seer qui­et­ly; “give me two pen­cils and I will show you.” The pen­cils were brought, and Land­seer, tak­ing one in each hand, drew simul­ta­ne­ous­ly and unhesi­tat­ing­ly the pro­file of a stag’s antlered head with one hand, and with the oth­er the per­fect out­line of the head of a horse.

Cer­tain­ly, Landseer’s renown stemmed from his paint­ings of ani­mals, par­tic­u­lar­ly hors­es, dogs and stags, although his most famous work is undoubt­ed­ly the set of four bronze lion sculp­tures at the base of Nelson’s Col­umn in Trafal­gar Square. Today’s sub­ject is prob­a­bly his next most famous work, though, being, as it is, the ulti­mate bis­cuit tin image of Scot­land: The Monarch of the Glen.

The Monarch of the Glen is an oil-on-can­vas paint­ing depict­ing a red deer stag, set against the steamy rugged hills of the Scot­tish High­lands. It was com­plet­ed in 1851 as part of a series of three pan­els intend­ed to hang in the Refresh­ment Rooms of the House of Lords, although that com­mis­sion nev­er came off due to some dis­pute or oth­er and it was sold into pri­vate own­er­ship. It also, how­ev­er, sold wide­ly in repro­duc­tions and became one of the most pop­u­lar paint­ings of the 19th cen­tu­ry. It prob­a­bly helped that Queen Vic­to­ria was a big fan.

The paint­ing was pur­chased in 1916 by the Pears soap com­pa­ny and this kicked off the Monarch’s career in adver­tis­ing. It was sold on to John Dewar & Sons dis­tillery and became their trade­mark before sim­i­lar­ly being used by Glen­fid­dich on their whisky bot­tles. A deriv­a­tive of the Monarch graced the shelves of Har­rods and Fort­num & Mason via the cans of Bax­ter’s Roy­al Game Soup, and of course, as implied, it adorned many a tin of short­bread bis­cuits. In 2017, the paint­ing was final­ly sold by its last own­er Dia­geo to the Nation­al Muse­um of Scot­land in Edin­burgh, where it can now be viewed by the pub­lic in all its majesty.

The stag has twelve points on his antlers, which in deer ter­mi­nol­o­gy makes him a “roy­al stag” not a “monarch stag”, for which six­teen points are need­ed, but let’s not quib­ble; he’s a mag­nif­i­cent beast.

The Monarch of the Glen

Commentaries on excellence in art, music, film, and literature