So today is the orthodox historical date for the opening of World War 1, the first world war of our epoch as we know/found it and generally remember, apparently provoked by an incident one month prior on 28th June 1914 with the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand assassinated at Sarajevo. On 28th July 2014 July Austria declared war on Serbia and so it went on, although many doubt that is how/why it really began.
War! What is it good for!?
Absolutely nothing? I don’t think so.
1) Lining the pockets of those atop the social/economic pyramid and the politi/polemicists begging for coin.
2) War games, scenario practice/experimentation – a whole load of test subjects available.
3) Wiping out excess ‘useless eaters’/people, places, wildlife.
4) Land/people/resource grabbing/transportation.
5) Distraction for all of the above.
7) Oh and fun for extreme sadists/sickos, their backup who relish the tidbits/casts offs/leftovers and voyeur fans who live vicariously through the actions of others in whole hearted, salivating support.
Here’s some interesting pics regarding postal censorship:
and that was 100 years ago, imagine today…
I found the post pics here: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/britain1906to1918/pdf/complete_G6.pdf An interesting exercise on thinking about propaganda showing a number of the UK/behalf of UK publications at the time who were all of course operating under DORA or Defence of the Realm Act.
The original Defence of the Realm Act (DORA), which became law on 8 August 1914, was little more than a paragraph long. This second revised and expanded version of the emergency legislation outlines a wider range of possible wartime offences against the British state. Trial by courts martial, for example, was now authorised for anyone contravening regulations designed – with suitable vagueness – ‘to prevent the spread of false reports or reports likely to cause disaffection to His Majesty’. DORA was extended a further three times during the conflict.
Defence of the Realm Consolidation Act, 1914 Ch.8.
An Act to consolidate and amend the Defence of the Realm Acts. 27th November 1914.
Be it enacted by the King’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-
1. – (1) His Majesty in Council has power during the continuance of the present war to issue regulations for securing the public safety and defence of the realm, and as to the powers and duties for that purpose of the Admiralty and Army Council and of the members of His Majesty’s forces and other persons acting on his behalf; and may by such regulations authorise the trial by courts-martial, or in the case of minor offences by courts of summary jurisdiction, and punishment of persons committing offences against the regulations and in particular against any of the provisions of such regulations designed:-
(a) to prevent persons communicating with the enemy or obtaining information for that purpose or any purpose calculated to jeopardise the success of the operations of any of His Majesty’s forces or the forces of his allies or to assist the enemy; or
(b) to secure the safety of His Majesty’s forces and ships and the safety of any means of communication and of railways, ports, and harbours; or
(c) to prevent the spread of false reports or reports likely to cause disaffection to His Majesty or to interfere with the success of His Majesty’s forces by land or sea or to prejudice His Majesty’s relations with foreign powers; or
(d) to secure the navigation of vessels in accordance with directions given by or under the authority of the Admiralty; or
(e) otherwise to prevent assistance being given to the enemy or the successful prosecution of the war being endangered.
(2) Any such regulations may provide for the suspension of any restrictions on the acquisition or user of land, or the exercise of the power of making byelaws, or any other power under the Defence Acts, 1842 to 1875, or the Military Lands Acts, 1891 to 1903, and any such regulations or any orders made thereunder affecting the pilotage of vessels may supersede any enactment, order, charter, byelaw, regulation or provision as to pilotage.
(3) It shall be lawful for the Admiralty or Army Council -
(a) to require that there shall be placed at their disposal the whole or any part of the output of any factory or workshop in which arms, ammunition, or warlike stores or equipment, or any articles required for the production thereof, are manufactured;
(b) to take possession of and use for the purpose of His Majesty’s naval or military service any such factory or workshop or any plant thereof;
and regulations und this Act may be made accordingly.
(4) For the purpose of the trial of a person for an offence under the regulations by court-martial and the punishment thereof, the person may be proceeded agains and dealt with as if he were a person subject to military law and had on active service committed an offence under section five of the Army Act:
Provided that where it is proved that the offence is committed with the intention of assisting the enemy a person convicted of such an offence by a court-martial shall be liable to suffer death.
(5) For the purpose of the trial of a person for an offence under the regulations by a court of summary jurisdiction and the punishment thereof, the offence shall be deemed to have been committed either at the place in which the same actually was committed or in any place in which the offender may be, and the maximum penalty which may be inflicted shall be imprisonment with or without had labour for a term of six months or a fine of one hundred pounds, or both such imprisonment and fine; section seventeen of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, shall not apply to charges of offences against the regulations, but any person aggrieved by a conviction of a court of summary jurisdiction may appeal in England to a court of quarter sessions, and in Scotland under and in terms of the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Acts, and in Ireland in manner prodided by the Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Acts.
(6) The regulations may authorise a court-martial or court of summary jurisdiction, in addition to any other punishment, to order the forfeiture of any goods in respect of which an offence against the regulations has been committed.
2. – (1) This Act may be cited as the Defence of the Realm Consolidation Act, 1914.
(2) The Defence of the Realm Act, 1914, and the Defence of the Realm (No. 2) Act, 1914, are hereby repealed, but nothing in this repeal shall affect any Orders in Council made thereunder, and all such Orders in Council shall, until altered or revoked by an Order in Council under this Act, continue in force and have effect as if made under this Act.
In practice this meant things like:
- no-one was allowed to talk about naval or military matters in public places
- no-one was allowed to spread rumours about military matters
- no-one was allowed to buy binoculars
- no-one was allowed to trespass on railway lines or bridges
- no-one was allowed to melt down gold or silver
- no-one was allowed to light bonfires or fireworks
- no-one was allowed to give bread to horses, horses or chickens
- no-one was allowed to use invisible ink when writing abroad
- no-one was allowed to buy brandy or whisky in a railway refreshment room
- no-one was allowed to ring church bells
- the government could take over any factory or workshop
- the government could try any civilian breaking these laws
- the government could take over any land it wanted to
- the government could censor newspapers
As the war continued and evolved, the government introduced more acts to DORA.
- the government introduced British Summer Time to give more daylight for extra work
- opening hours in pubs were cut
- beer was watered down
- customers in pubs were not allowed to buy a round of drinks
and of course the extremely important imprisonment without trial.
On 8th August 1914, the House of Commons passed the Defence of the Realm Act (DORA) without debate. The legislation gave the government executive powers to suppress published criticism, imprison without trial and to commandeer economic resources for the war effort.
During the war publishing information that was calculated to be indirectly or directly of use to the enemy became an offence and accordingly punishable in a court of law. This included any description of war and any news that was likely to cause any conflict between the public and military authorities.
In August 1914 the British government established the War Office Press Bureau under F. E. Smith. The idea was this organisation would censor news and telegraphic reports from the British Army and then issue it to the press. Lord Kitchener decided to appoint Colonel Ernest Swinton to become the British Army’s official journalist on the Western Front. Swinton’s reports were first censored at G.H.Q. in France and then personally vetted by Kitchener before being released to the press. Letters written by members of the armed forces to their friends and families were also read and censored by the military authorities.
After complaints from the USA the British government decided to look again at how the war was reported. After a Cabinet meeting on the subject in January, 1915, the government decided to change its policy and to allow selected journalists to report the war. Five men were chosen: Philip Gibbs (Daily Chronicle and the Daily Telegraph), Percival Philips (Daily Express and the Morning Post), William Beach Thomas (Daily Mail and the Daily Mirror) Henry Perry Robinson (The Times and the Daily News) and Herbert Russell (Reuters News Agency). Before their reports could be sent back to England, they had to be submitted to C. E. Montague, the former leader writer of the Manchester Guardian.
Over the next three years other journalists such as John Buchan, Valentine Williams, Hamilton Fyfe and Henry Nevinson, became accredited war correspondents. To remain on the Western Front, these journalists had to accept government control over what they wrote.
DORA was also used to control civilian behaviour. This including regulating alcohol consumption and food supplies. In October 1915 the British government announced several measures they believed would reduce alcohol consumption. A No Treating Order laid down that people could not buy alcoholic drinks for other people. Public House opening times were also reduced to 12.00 noon to 2.30 pm and 6.30 to 9.30 pm. Before the law was changed, public houses could open from 5 am in the morning to 12.30 pm at night.
In 1916 the Clyde Workers’ Committee journal, The Worker, was prosecuted under the Defence of the Realm Act for an article criticizing the war. William Gallacher and John Muir, the editor were both found guilty and sent to prison. Gallacher for six months and Muir for a year.
The Clyde Workers’ Committee was formed to campaign against the Munitions Act, which forbade engineers from leaving the works where they were employed. On 25th March 1916, David Kirkwood and other members of the Clyde Workers’ Committee were arrested by the authorities under the Defence of the Realm Act. Then men were court-martialled and sentenced to be deported from Glasgow.
The Ministry of Food did not introduce food rationing until January 1918. Sugar was the first to be rationed and this was later followed by butchers’ meat. The idea of rationing food was to guarantee supplies, not to reduce consumption. This was successful and official figures show that the intake of calories almost kept up to the pre-war level.
The growing disillusionment with the war was reflected in the novels that were written at the time. A. T. Fitzroy’s Despised and Rejected was published in April 1918. A thousand copies were sold before the book was banned and its publisher, C. W. Daniel, was successfully prosecuted for sedition. Another novel, What Not: A Prophetic Comedy by Rose Macaulay was due to be published in the autumn of 1918. When the censors discovered that the book ridiculed wartime bureaucracy, its publication was stopped and did not appear until after the Armistice.
Further detail on the Acts can be found here: archive.org/details/defenceofrealmma00grearich
One effect of DORA was the repression of sexual deviancy of girls and women, or as I think of it a witch hunt and counter to the first wave of the Suffragette movement. The govt released all the Suffragette prisoners on an amnesty, perhaps an agreement that they wouldn’t really continue with the activities they’d been focused on and instead turn their lens onto the war effort instead of fighting for their rights as at least half the population. A common enemy was introduced, namely those not visibly friends or in hand with the UK, and so the women could get to their ‘proper place’ of supporting their men.
“Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.”
In Defense of Women (1918) – H.L. Mencken
Note – I wouldn’t call him a defender of women… I’m just quoting him on the divide and conquer premise, such as the quotes below:
16th Feb 1987 at a conference at the Kremlin the ‘Survival of Humanity'; Gorbachev said:
“At our meeting in Geneva, the U.S. President said that if the earth faced an invasion by extraterrestrials, the United states and the Soviet Union would join forces to repel such an invasion. I shall not dispute the hypothesis, although I think it’s early yet to worry about such an intrusion. It is much more important to think about the problems that have entered in our common home.”
21st Sept 1987, Reagan to the United Nations 42nd General Assembly:
“In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside of this world. And yet I ask – is not an alien force already among us?”
Many feminists went along with this guided by apparently an even greater purpose (fighting against a common enemy – who would still be made up of roughly half women with similar problems) and so entrenched a long and bitter breakup into feminist factions/divisions. Many found it an opportunity for more influence with women moving into the workforce (though who were pushed back aways after the war and further necessitating successive waves of feminism). As usual some of the strongest repressors of women are other women, the tools or orchestrators of male oppressors in misogyny. Since their home, child to adult rearing, and utility efforts such as cooking and sewing, things usually seen as a woman’s domain were nary appreciated (but aggrandized and specialist professions when done by male chefs and tailors for example) many saw the war as an opportunity to show just how tough, able and helpful they were – to be accounted for and respected in society and not second class to whatever their male counterpart was i.e. the wife of a working class male being seen as less than her husband by said husband, peers and other classes. Unfortunately for those women they proved essential tools and made a lot of headway, which made them more threatening than usual to the established ways of thinking and many didn’t want them getting used to their new found positions, getting ahead of themselves. It presented another case of getting in bed with the enemy, willingly or begrudgingly, though this time between women and supporters of in general instead of the previous deal with the devil, ahem governing bodies, which got them out of prison an out of the harsher part of the public eye.
This ‘agreement’ included some traditionalists wanting to keep females in their place and let them know their current status was an exception only and some feminists wanting to show that women could be in more authoritarian positions as well, such as the police. Unfortunately this didn’t really work out for many females as the onus of sexual behaviour was still on them and focused on them rather than re-educating males hence our current state of affairs where rape is seen as an occupational hazard in the armed forces/military, it seems there aren’t enough civilians for those governed by lust, greed and power (especially in the guise of authority) they love to take advantage of their own too in the purported survival of fittest trait of creation. That of course doesn’t stop or change the situation of the increasing number of women and unfortunately ‘pretty’ looking males joining the ranks or anyone who gets on the wrong side of the worse bullies and gang leaders once signed up or conscripted. So a number of feminists sold out and others got side tracked in their quest for fairness that helped lead to the quotes below as well as the current conflict between the images of so-called female empowerment depicted as either flaunting and superfluous or a dependent consumer in confusion between ever increasing and contradicting expectations/pressures to be everything at once and excel at it. Too many agendas trapped in a box, I hate strategy games especially the multi-layered ones especially ones that include creatures who are apt to be ‘fair weather friends‘/allies. (Trivia – who changed their name to Windsor in 1914 and continued to marry heavily into German ‘noble’ houses, educated there, in the Hitler Youth, accepted in Nazi circles there and in Italy through marriage and affiliation all whilst WW2 was going on.)
The Women Police
The First World War and Women Patrols
During the Edwardian era (1901-14) a great deal attention was paid to ‘deviant’ female sexual behaviour. Social surveys by Charles Booth and Joseph Rowntree pointed out the vast numbers of people living in poverty in, respectively, London and York. Fears were expressed that these ‘unfit’ people would be a drain on the nation’s resources, an idea confirmed by the large number of British recruits who were rejected for armed service during the Boer War (1899-1901). Contemporary ideas and scientific development, especially Darwinism (alongside its more maligned cousin eugenics), lent intellectual credence to the idea that Britain’s ‘racial stock’ was in decline. Particular attention was paid to the problem of inheritance and social problem groups, such as the poor and the ‘criminal classes’. These events placed a premium on the behaviour of women as ‘guardians of the race’. The First World War magnified and intensified these issues.
At the outbreak of war, contemporaries testified to the explosion of ‘khaki fever’. ‘Khaki fever’ describes the excitement that young girls and women were believed to experience at the presence of soldiers as a wave of patriotism swept across the nation. While ‘khaki fever’ died out quickly, as the reality of war hit home, concerns lasted throughout the war about the behaviour of these women and young girls. Concern centred on their relations with soldiers. Curfews were placed on towns where large bodies of troops were stationed. In 1918 the notorious regulation 40d was promulgated under the Defence of the Realm Act 1914. This made it a criminal offence for any woman with venereal disease to solicit or to have sexual intercourse with a man.
This concern with the behaviour of young women and girls provided an opportunity for feminists to press their case for the need for women police. Two groups of women organized patrols to deal with these wayward women. The more radical of the two was the Women Police Service (WPS) set up by Margaret Damer Dawson and Mary Allen; both had links with the militant suffragette Women’s Social and Political Union. The WPS adopted an interventionist style of rescue work, warning errant girls and soldiers’ wives of the danger of immoral behaviour. The women involved in these patrols were issued with a uniform and were to adhere to a strict code of conduct. As can be seen, the regulations followed a strict line, similar to that of the male police, regarding talking on duty, punctuality, the need to avoid accepting ‘tips’, and the dangers of ‘gossiping’.
The other group of women police were the voluntary patrols co-ordinated by the middle-class National Union of Women Workers (NUWW); few of its members were militant feminists. Indeed, the NUWW was reluctant to employ women who had been arrested during suffragette demonstrations and protests. Unlike the WPS, these voluntary patrols tried to disassociate themselves from any ideas of ‘rescue work’ and charity, and saw themselves as aides to the established police. Both groups of women spent a great deal of time policing the behaviour of working-class women, patrolling parks and public spaces, separating courting couples, and moving on ‘dangerous’ women. The WPS even signed a contract with the Ministry of Munitions to police the growing number of women workers in munitions factories. Crucially, these women did not possess power of arrest, though they would present evidence in court on the behalf of male officers.
I’m not a supporter of prostitution or ‘sex work‘ or buying/selling/pimping in the slightest but there’s a reason why it’s known as the ‘oldest profession’, because it’s expected and expected to be available and accessible at all times. When not found and even when found, extra is made of those who are not in the ‘profession’. These women and children get demonized, made into an extra low underclass or undermined by a vainglorious few who do it out of enjoyment and are ‘compensated’ either materialistically and/or even socially – similar to the ‘first wife‘ or concubine in a harem being proud of her position imo.
The most effective ways of undermining someone other than or alongside bankrupting? Attacking their reputation. Sexual behaviour questions of either deviant or criminal nature and incitement/orchestrating group behaviour are often used to hold back progress, both for people who have committed such deeds and those who haven’t. Calling them a ‘nutter‘ is another way of course.
The War Office responded in April 1915 by passing a measure under the sweeping Defence of the Realm Act (DORA): regulation 13a, which prohibited any woman who had been convicted of a prostitution-related offence from being in the vicinity of any place where His Majesty’s Troops were stationed. At the same time, social purity groups, and the National Vigilance Association (NVA) in particular, began to campaign for Parliament to legislate for more state control over such young women, and introduced three bills between March 1917 and July 1918, which included clauses stipulating that any woman under the age of eighteen convicted of a solicitation offence could be incarcerated in a ‘rescue home’ until her nineteenth birthday.22 The bill also called for heavier penalties for solicitation by women over the age of eighteen, introducing higher fines and longer terms of imprisonment. The AMSH described the
measure as ‘imprisoning girls under double standard laws and calling it “rescue”’.23
These wartime debates served as new rallying points for abolitionists in Britain. The AMSH quickly launched a campaign against Regulation 13a, and a still more vehement one against the NVA-sponsored bills, a position which drove a wedge between the two associations large enough to warrant mentioning in the AMSH’s obituary of the NVA’s secretary, Alexander Coote, just after the First World War.24 The AMSH also became a leader in the protest against the even more contentious DORA regulation 40d, which criminalized any woman who solicited or had intercourse with any member of His Majesty’s troops if she was infected with a venereal disease.25
Dr Mary Gordon, the chief medical inspector of women’s prisons and AMSH member, felt that the way in which the British legal system’s operations, in her words, ‘manufactured prostitutes’.37 This concern became a prominent subject in Gordon’s book, Penal Discipline:
The common prostitute, by being something which it is not an offence to be, can commit offences which other women cannot commit, and can be brought to courts without the testimony of any annoyed person, and sent to prison on the witness of the police [she wrote]. But how does a woman become a common prostitute? She becomes one by the simple process of the policeman moving her on, probably telling her she is one, warning her he will arrest her, and finally arresting her, swearing in court she is one, and that she has loitered with the intention of soliciting, or that he has seen her soliciting. After that she is eligible for punishment and takes her place in the ranks of ‘common prostitutes’.38
Note – ASMH stood for Association for Moral and Social Hygiene which succeeded those in favour of Social Purity (traditionalists).
That said the ASMH were very busy with trying to get better treatment of prostitutes, preventing women in general been seen as or treated as demeaned prostitutes and repressing the practise in general though they were more tolerant/libertarian than other and later abolitionist groups. Hence went back and forth between standing up for women and men owning their own bodies and consensually doing what they want, and apparently trying to decrease prostitution and prevent sexual disease. Where I agree with their not wanting to hide the situation behind closed doors, like some societies do pretending they’re against all manner of classed sins yet it’s still rampant, trafficking and rape still high, as aforementioned I’m not an advocate of prostitution or sex work though at the same time I don’t want them abused. I find such practise/work essentially feeds into the ethos of all life as property/stock/assets and leads to things like glamourization of sexuality increasing demand for accessibility of prostitutes/sex workers and people behaving more casually, people not caring who they sleep with/give their bodies to or wondering where they’ve been yet consider their phone number too precious to give away the next morning, and pornography being seen as a choice of consenting adults which hides trafficking and missing persons via slavery and snuff. Basically the opposite of ‘moral and social hygiene‘.
The Act also made it difficult for satirical papers such as the well known ‘Punch‘ featuring the wife beating, baby killing Punch from ‘Punch and Judy’, the national beloved British icon who brings such laughter and joy to both child and adult watchers of the puppet show alike. (Akin to Tom and Jerry from Hanna and Barbera before they were Hanna-Barbera Productions, re-inventing themselves after the wars and their parts in. Later re-satiricalized – not a word, but basically saying satire of satire – by ‘Itchy and Scratchy’ from ‘The Simpsons’ though since all those characters were non-humans people can enjoy them ‘at a distance‘ and as ‘fiction‘ whereas Punch and Judy is just creepy holding a special place with people who enjoyed them as children and seemingly under the influence of rampant nostalgia and tradition for sake of tradition, seeing it as a bit of fun, a harmless puppet show. Yeah we’re all puppets really to varying extents, even if you can’t see the strings though some doing their darndest to untangle/cut them.)
Anyway Punch was like the narrator of the paper acting as an observer of the war and the paper was aimed at all classes though quite derisive of the working class, men that weren’t in the forces and made a major target of women yo-yoing between putting them down yet acknowledging their changing roles and labour and not knowing where it stood unable to like either women workers or women who stayed at home. So such media muddled through the war keeping the ‘chin up sonny‘ and ‘we’re doing well, keep at it‘ ethos though at odds with themselves at times too. This precarious, tight rope situation left space for trench journals written by soldiers to do well, with a bunch of in-house references but distributed to civilians. Those papers could be more subversive, more thought provoking but of course when it came down to it neither types of publication wanted the public to think of them as pawns on a chessboard doing the dirty work killing, maiming, raping, stealing etc generally being pirates. So the satire, humour, prose, poetry, editorials, letters etc were just hard hitting enough to show it wasn’t as straightforward and successful as the govt might want things to appear whilst implementing ‘necessary austerity‘ but maintained the *wink, wink, nudge, nudge* to outright ironic style to help dispel the doldrums and depression, an insight, a peek at what was happening and a form of noosed or hooded expression.
The Wipers Times, Issue 5
Modern examples of satirical and topical art by Pawel Kucznski. (I personally find his style like René Magritte’s but his concepts more focused).
Polish artist Pawel Kuczynski creates thought-provoking illustrations that comment on social, economic, and political issues through satire. The illustrator’s portfolio ranges from criticizing military practices and the incentives behind war, to themes of mortality and reinterpreting the uses of social media as elusive spying platforms. Each image reflects its fair share of serious issues balanced with whimsical illustrations.
Taking a recurring interest in the power of the dollar and its connection to war, Kuczynski tends to reintroduce the image of artillery, protective military gear, and money as codependent objects. On a more domestic level, the artist also produces images of society’s ironic treatment of cats versus farm animals. In one image, the house cat is treated like a king, sitting patiently and waiting to feast on any number of animals from the butcher’s farm.
In another, Kuczynski creates a brilliant rendering of alcoholism. The visual is of an individual chugging a beer bottle with a floating fishing line in it. One can foresee the future: as he drinks the ale, the snare gets closer to hooking him in. Overall, the illustrator’s satirical work is all-encompassing, touching on universal subjects of global problems as well as personal demons.
Some interesting quotes:
“Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” – Woodrow Wilson, from his book ‘The New Freedom’ (1913)
“We shall have world government, whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government will be achieved by consent or by conquest.” – 17 Feb 1950, James Warburg, member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
“Sarah, if the American people had ever known the truth about what we Bushes have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched.” – Dec 1992, George Bush Sr, in an interview with Sarah McClendon.
A funny anime based on personifications of many of the countries in the Axis Powers and Allied Forces in the World Wars:
Just something I wrote a long time ago which I think is relevant now:
The sky is now pitch Black, as Black as eternity. There are no stars only a full moon. It shines solitary over the Black, crashing waves beneath it like a watery grave filled with lost souls grasping and clawing to devour all in their reach. As Black as it is I can still see perfectly. I am standing in the same spot as I was this morning and it has happened, the all encompassing change happened in a flicker, blink and you’ll miss it, if you’re on the outside looking in. Those of us within don’t have the privilege.
The never-ending Golden beach is now a vast desert of stones and wild terrain. The sky appears to be moving, yes, actually moving as its armoured thunderclouds frantically rush in a single direction as if being pushed by an invisible force. The moon however stays still as if fixed in that position, her sad but unnerving rays show the world beneath it at its worst. As the sun fell below the horizon the following events occurred; the Reds, Yellows, Oranges and Pinks in the sky rushed away as if chased by the oncoming murkiness; hidden shadows and ghostly images in the fog likening themselves to a legion. They frightened the colours who fled lest they might be forever engulfed in its emptiness. Those who didn’t make it were drowned in doom or put to sleep.
It happened so fast yet in slow mo with grim, gritty detail, and it’s been so long since. How many were caught up in this mist until the dawn that will come like a thief in the night, will batter and break this solid bubble.
There is a sound, almost singing, voices or voice that resonates from the sky and a tribal drum striking terror and anxiety in the hearts of even the bravest, but perhaps a smile from the wisest. The sound is overpowering, unrelenting and will seep into your soul if you have one, or many locked away. It warns us; its long hum that turns into a thrilling, deafening chant is the signal for the warriors to wake and the heart to hope. She comes.
And Mum’s comment: