Friday, 9 April 2010

Jackson's crazy ideas

No, not that Jackson.

When stupid, ignorant people tell you that they believe in something very silly there's no point in arguing with them; that's what stupid, ignorant people do, they believe in very silly things. What is really depressing is to discover that a person for whom one had respect or even admiration has inexplicably picked up some crackpot notion and is enthusiastically promoting it.

I sent this email about three weeks ago to the star of Women in Love, Elizabeth R, A Touch of Class and many other acclaimed films and plays:

(An open letter: to be posted on the internet early in April)

Dear Glenda Jackson

I was surprised and disappointed to find that your name appears on the list of MPs supporting David Tredinnick's Early Day Motion dissenting from to the recent Science and Technology Select Committee’s report on homeopathy. The motion calls for this quackery to be encouraged and funded by the government and the NHS.

Looking at the record of your distinguished career in Parliament I do not see that you have ever before espoused so disreputable a cause, and it is very hard to believe that you have thought seriously about what exactly it is that you are supporting, and just who it is whose ridiculous views you appear to share.

A glance at any of these webpages will perhaps give you some reasons why you should think again:

I understand that you will be seeking election in the revised Hampstead constituency. I am not now a resident but I do have family, friends, and acquaintances who live there. Many of them might well be voting for you, and I will be writing to all of them before polling day making them aware of your views on this matter. However much they admire your stance on other past and current issues, it may be that they will not be at all keen to return to Westminster an MP who subscribes to these absurd and harmful superstitions.

Yours, etc.

[I don't really expect to get an any response to this. Most MPs, particularly those who are celebrities outside parliament, have no time to engage in correspondence with non-constituents, though I suppose conscientious ones might get someone to glance at their messages in case any are of interest.]

No comments: