I have just finished reading Jane Smiley's trilogy in which she follows a family for a hundred years, from 1920 to 2020.
The research that went into this novel was comprehensive and is evident in the narrative as it unfolds.
Each chapter, and there are a hundred spread over three books, is titled with the year that it covers.
The novel unfolds with family members being born and dying, experiencing tragedy and success, loving and being loved, but all the time being shaped and changed and challenged by external events.
The historical chapters faithfully reflect the events as they occurred in each respective year but as 2015 gives way to 2016 and through to 2020 there is a fascinating and subtle change to the events described and their impact on the family.
Smiley did not anticipate the outcome of the elections in Canada and quite sensibly did not reflect on the impact of the anti-austerity movement in Europe probably because it had little consequence in America.
But two geo-political phenomena dominate both the historic developments as the author describes their effect on her families and their possible effects from 2016 onwards.
These phenomena are Global Warming and the political strength of China.
As I read the final chapters I began to develop a deep pessimism about the future as it is emerging under the current British Government, as Global Warming reaches a tipping point beyond which it becomes irreversible and as we sign deals with the Chinese Government whilst apparently severing our links with Europe so the list of discontents, not just with Globalisation a la Stiglitz but with our own elected government and the outcomes of austerity as it impacts on individuals and families, lengthens.
Inequality increases as manufacturing declines, as the service sector enlarges and financial services are freed from control or supervision so wealth flows towards the rich increasing inequality and limiting the life choices of those without resources.
A recently published OECD Report indicates that income inequality has risen (is rising) in Britain faster than in other rich nations.
The reason for this increase in inequality is given as the rise of a 'financial services elite' concentrating wealth into the hands of a tiny minority.
Peter Mandelson may well have been relaxed about individuals becoming extremely wealthy but it is becoming clearer and clearer that the outcome of money flowing into the pockets of the wealthy and somehow mysteriously replicating itself is a deeply unjust and unequal society, a society that is not at ease with itself, a society that could be described as broken.
Changing things is not easy when the manicured hands of those with the money and the power rest on the levers which can make change happen.
In my neighbourhood I notice that the balance of ownership and renting is changing, those who own the asset hold on to it, better to rent than sell, better for whom? But that is the equation. As house prices rise it makes all kind of sense to hold on to the asset and through letting to derive an income from it.
And as social housing is sold off through right to buy so choice becomes more limited for those households seeking to access the market and the private sector adjusts itself accordingly.
And what is happening at the local and community level is reflected at the global.
Public ownership is rejected in favour of private except that the so called private investors are themselves publicly owned so as China signs an agreement to build our nuclear energy future we hand over our energy dependency to the Government of China.
We can march, campaign, write letters to editors, blog, protest, pray and with luck, in five years time, vote for change.
But the damage will have been done.
The low paid will be paid even less, inequality will be deeper.
Affordable houses will remain unbuilt.
We may no longer be part of Europe.
The coastline of the UK may start to look very different as the oceans rise and the storm blowing outside my window will if anything be blowing more fiercely.
I buy my energy and telephony from energy and telephony co-operatives they are successful but if the economic and political climate changes who knows?
Even more scarily, although apparently I read in today's Guardian that someone under eighty should not be referred too as elderly, nevertheless I will be older and possibly more reliant on health care being available free at the point of need.
In her novel Jane Smiley asks through one of her characters 'have we lived through a golden age?'
That is indeed the title of the third book.
I was born before the NHS was founded in 1948, I was a baby boomer, I lived and grew up in a welfare state that I learnt to take for granted whilst appreciating and valuing the real benefits that it provided for me and my family, I can say that in my lifetime I have lived through a golden age.
It is however hard to imagine what future generations will experience.
The research that went into this novel was comprehensive and is evident in the narrative as it unfolds.
Each chapter, and there are a hundred spread over three books, is titled with the year that it covers.
The novel unfolds with family members being born and dying, experiencing tragedy and success, loving and being loved, but all the time being shaped and changed and challenged by external events.
The historical chapters faithfully reflect the events as they occurred in each respective year but as 2015 gives way to 2016 and through to 2020 there is a fascinating and subtle change to the events described and their impact on the family.
Smiley did not anticipate the outcome of the elections in Canada and quite sensibly did not reflect on the impact of the anti-austerity movement in Europe probably because it had little consequence in America.
But two geo-political phenomena dominate both the historic developments as the author describes their effect on her families and their possible effects from 2016 onwards.
These phenomena are Global Warming and the political strength of China.
As I read the final chapters I began to develop a deep pessimism about the future as it is emerging under the current British Government, as Global Warming reaches a tipping point beyond which it becomes irreversible and as we sign deals with the Chinese Government whilst apparently severing our links with Europe so the list of discontents, not just with Globalisation a la Stiglitz but with our own elected government and the outcomes of austerity as it impacts on individuals and families, lengthens.
Inequality increases as manufacturing declines, as the service sector enlarges and financial services are freed from control or supervision so wealth flows towards the rich increasing inequality and limiting the life choices of those without resources.
A recently published OECD Report indicates that income inequality has risen (is rising) in Britain faster than in other rich nations.
The reason for this increase in inequality is given as the rise of a 'financial services elite' concentrating wealth into the hands of a tiny minority.
Peter Mandelson may well have been relaxed about individuals becoming extremely wealthy but it is becoming clearer and clearer that the outcome of money flowing into the pockets of the wealthy and somehow mysteriously replicating itself is a deeply unjust and unequal society, a society that is not at ease with itself, a society that could be described as broken.
Changing things is not easy when the manicured hands of those with the money and the power rest on the levers which can make change happen.
In my neighbourhood I notice that the balance of ownership and renting is changing, those who own the asset hold on to it, better to rent than sell, better for whom? But that is the equation. As house prices rise it makes all kind of sense to hold on to the asset and through letting to derive an income from it.
And as social housing is sold off through right to buy so choice becomes more limited for those households seeking to access the market and the private sector adjusts itself accordingly.
And what is happening at the local and community level is reflected at the global.
Public ownership is rejected in favour of private except that the so called private investors are themselves publicly owned so as China signs an agreement to build our nuclear energy future we hand over our energy dependency to the Government of China.
We can march, campaign, write letters to editors, blog, protest, pray and with luck, in five years time, vote for change.
But the damage will have been done.
The low paid will be paid even less, inequality will be deeper.
Affordable houses will remain unbuilt.
We may no longer be part of Europe.
The coastline of the UK may start to look very different as the oceans rise and the storm blowing outside my window will if anything be blowing more fiercely.
I buy my energy and telephony from energy and telephony co-operatives they are successful but if the economic and political climate changes who knows?
Even more scarily, although apparently I read in today's Guardian that someone under eighty should not be referred too as elderly, nevertheless I will be older and possibly more reliant on health care being available free at the point of need.
In her novel Jane Smiley asks through one of her characters 'have we lived through a golden age?'
That is indeed the title of the third book.
I was born before the NHS was founded in 1948, I was a baby boomer, I lived and grew up in a welfare state that I learnt to take for granted whilst appreciating and valuing the real benefits that it provided for me and my family, I can say that in my lifetime I have lived through a golden age.
It is however hard to imagine what future generations will experience.
No comments:
Post a Comment