In two minds on talks!

Scan page 10

THE BBC is re-running Kenneth Clark's commentary on 'Civilisation' (Friday, 7.45pm; BBC2). Clark, who died in May, made the 14 part series in 1969.

The first programme, last Friday, covered the Dark Ages - the period from the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in the face of the Germanic invasions in the 5th century, to the beginnins of the new feudal order under the empire of Charlemagne, in the early 9th century.

Clark presented John Ruskin's opinion as also his own: that, of humanity's words, deeds and art, the latter is the decisive test, measure and substance of a civilisation. This is a rather narrow and elitist view of civilisation, though it is true as far as it goes.

Clark also identifies 'civilisation exclusively with West European civilisation, and the identification has a particularly distorting effect for this period - the run-in to Western Europe by Martin Thomas in fact becoming the most advanced centre of civilisation, rather than the relatively backward area it had been in Antiquity.

The partial preservation of the cultural heritage of Antiquity by the Christian Church was Clark's theme, and it is part of the truth. (Though he gave the misleading impression that Christianity in the Dark Ages was confined to small pockets: in truth the Germanic invaders were converted very rapidly).

The other part of the truth was the creation, amidst the terrible collapse of prévious civilisation, of a new, more dynamic social order.

Much else of the same sort could be said. But it would be wrong to lose sight of what's valuable in the series a heap of such criticisms.

Socialism is not about negating past civilisation, but making its fruits more widely accessible and building on it.

Some of us got dribs and drabs of education on the art and culture of the past at school -but how many of us remember any of that? With even the sketchiest idea of a Marxist view of history in our heads, the whole story becomes more meaningful, but by then we have forgotten inost of it.

It would be difficult to find a more accessible way of learning or re-learning some of that story than this series. Watch it if you can.

And if irritation at Clark's commentary drives you to try to find out more about the real processes behind the art and culture, all the better. The first programme set me re-reading Perry Anderson's book, 'Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism', and I recommend it. following me Oh no! not again" of Ashes to Ashes.

Funk and feel lifted in Fame, the brass/horn section being a noticeable improvement on the synthesised "look we can play the dots" tour of 1978 (recorded on "Stage").

Also, here, and on the recent LP Let's Dance, are the first time where guitar solos are not boring - thank you Earl Shik and Stevie Vaughn.

Soulfulness and little more focused saxes and vocals rang true in Young Americans. Holding back in these moments, particularly in Space Oddity, paid off for the energy and electricity generated was astonishing - fiery and erotic in Let's Dance and Stay.

Lou Reed's White Light, White Heat didn't seem dated, Bowie's new intensity helping out here, highlighting the intimacy of the show.

Reed's songs had always been flippant and close to audience and the added technology of a huge video screen, make this as possible as it can be with an audience of tens of thousands.

How a song writer can rely on such simple structures and still make a new noise is mystifying but Bowie has proved that it can be done as long as the terms of reference are not simply musical. ARTHUR Scargill's militant stance for mass action and against talks with the Tories hit the headlines of Saturday's Morning Star, coupled with an interview in similar vein.

One might have thought that this daily paper of the Communist Party would be fearlessly promoting this line and strongly attacking those who oppose it.

Not so. The Star's coverage during the preceding week had seen its Industrial Correspondent deftly tip-toeing through the tulips to avoid offending right wing union bosses.

Friday's Morning Star chose the bizarre headline "Murray backs action to defend rights outside Parliament" to conceal its report of the speech to the NUR conference in which Murray attacked Scargill as "plain daft"

This was no sub-editing blunder. Wednesday's Morning Star had attached the headline Unions must fight Tories to an account of a speech by outgoing Confed President Pam Turner (GMBATU) which actually called for talks with the Tories.

• The Star went even further and deleted the key passage from its report of the speech: only readers of the capitalist press could discover her carefully phrased offer that:

• We are prepared to work with any democratically elected government - but not on our knees."

The Morning Star, for its part, appears to be prepared to present the "best" side of any existing union leadership - if necessary on its knees.

Who does Tribune support in the Labour leadership elections? A Comment article in the June 24 edition makes it clear that they oppose the "nightmare" combination of Kinnock and Hattersley: but says nothing of whom they do support.

Kinnock is generously described, Hattersley denounced: but none of the other candidates is mentioned. Nor, significantly, is the issue of the witch-hunt, to the pursuit of which both men are equally pledged, and which is opposed only by Eric Heffer and Michael Meacher.

So where does Tribune stand on Eric Heffer's challenge to Kinnock?

Advertisement Which waynforward