Terms and Conditions

These terms and conditions of use refer to the London Review of Books and the London Review Bookshop website ( — hereafter ‘LRB Website’). These terms and conditions apply to all users of the LRB Website ("you"), including individual subscribers to the print edition of the LRB who wish to take advantage of our free 'subscriber only' access to archived material ("individual users") and users who are authorised to access the LRB Website by subscribing institutions ("institutional users").

Each time you use the LRB Website you signify your acceptance of these terms and conditions. If you do not agree, or are not comfortable with any part of this document, your only remedy is not to use the LRB Website.

  1. By registering for access to the LRB Website and/or entering the LRB Website by whatever route of access, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions currently prevailing.
  2. The London Review of Books ("LRB") reserves the right to change these terms and conditions at any time and you should check for any alterations regularly. Continued usage of the LRB Website subsequent to a change in the terms and conditions constitutes acceptance of the current terms and conditions.
  3. The terms and conditions of any subscription agreements which educational and other institutions have entered into with the LRB apply in addition to these terms and conditions.
  4. You undertake to indemnify the LRB fully for all losses damages and costs incurred as a result of your breaching these terms and conditions.
  5. The information you supply on registration to the LRB Website shall be accurate and complete. You will notify the LRB promptly of any changes of relevant details by emailing the registrar. You will not assist a non-registered person to gain access to the LRB Website by supplying them with your password. In the event that the LRB considers that you have breached the requirements governing registration, that you are in breach of these terms and conditions or that your or your institution's subscription to the LRB lapses, your registration to the LRB Website will be terminated.
  6. Each individual subscriber to the LRB (whether a person or organisation) is entitled to the registration of one person to use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site. This user is an 'individual user'.
  7. The London Review of Books operates a ‘no questions asked’ cancellation policy in accordance with UK legislation. Please contact us to cancel your subscription and receive a full refund for the cost of all unposted issues.
  8. Use of the 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is strictly for the personal use of each individual user who may read the content on the screen, download, store or print single copies for their own personal private non-commercial use only, and is not to be made available to or used by any other person for any purpose.
  9. Each institution which subscribes to the LRB is entitled to grant access to persons to register on and use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site under the terms and conditions of its subscription agreement with the LRB. These users are 'institutional users'.
  10. Each institutional user of the LRB may access and search the LRB database and view its entire contents, and may also reproduce insubstantial extracts from individual articles or other works in the database to which their institution's subscription provides access, including in academic assignments and theses, online and/or in print. All quotations must be credited to the author and the LRB. Institutional users are not permitted to reproduce any entire article or other work, or to make any commercial use of any LRB material (including sale, licensing or publication) without the LRB's prior written permission. Institutions may notify institutional users of any additional or different conditions of use which they have agreed with the LRB.
  11. Users may use any one computer to access the LRB web site 'subscriber only' content at any time, so long as that connection does not allow any other computer, networked or otherwise connected, to access 'subscriber only' content.
  12. The LRB Website and its contents are protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights. You acknowledge that all intellectual property rights including copyright in the LRB Website and its contents belong to or have been licensed to the LRB or are otherwise used by the LRB as permitted by applicable law.
  13. All intellectual property rights in articles, reviews and essays originally published in the print edition of the LRB and subsequently included on the LRB Website belong to or have been licensed to the LRB. This material is made available to you for use as set out in paragraph 8 (if you are an individual user) or paragraph 10 (if you are an institutional user) only. Save for such permitted use, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt such material in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department.
  14. All intellectual property rights in images on the LRB Website are owned by the LRB except where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited. Save for such material taken for permitted use set out above, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt LRB’s images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department. Where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, reproduce or translate such images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the copyright holder. The LRB will not undertake to supply contact details of any attributed or credited copyright holder.
  15. The LRB Website is provided on an 'as is' basis and the LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website will be accessible by any particular browser, operating system or device.
  16. The LRB makes no express or implied representation and gives no warranty of any kind in relation to any content available on the LRB Website including as to the accuracy or reliability of any information either in its articles, essays and reviews or in the letters printed in its letter page or material supplied by third parties. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) arising from the publication of any materials on the LRB Website or incurred as a consequence of using or relying on such materials.
  17. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) for any legal or other consequences (including infringement of third party rights) of any links made to the LRB Website.
  18. The LRB is not responsible for the content of any material you encounter after leaving the LRB Website site via a link in it or otherwise. The LRB gives no warranty as to the accuracy or reliability of any such material and to the fullest extent permitted by law excludes all liability that may arise in respect of or as a consequence of using or relying on such material.
  19. This site may be used only for lawful purposes and in a manner which does not infringe the rights of, or restrict the use and enjoyment of the site by, any third party. In the event of a chat room, message board, forum and/or news group being set up on the LRB Website, the LRB will not undertake to monitor any material supplied and will give no warranty as to its accuracy, reliability, originality or decency. By posting any material you agree that you are solely responsible for ensuring that it is accurate and not obscene, defamatory, plagiarised or in breach of copyright, confidentiality or any other right of any person, and you undertake to indemnify the LRB against all claims, losses, damages and costs incurred in consequence of your posting of such material. The LRB will reserve the right to remove any such material posted at any time and without notice or explanation. The LRB will reserve the right to disclose the provenance of such material, republish it in any form it deems fit or edit or censor it. The LRB will reserve the right to terminate the registration of any person it considers to abuse access to any chat room, message board, forum or news group provided by the LRB.
  20. Any e-mail services supplied via the LRB Website are subject to these terms and conditions.
  21. You will not knowingly transmit any virus, malware, trojan or other harmful matter to the LRB Website. The LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website is free from contaminating matter, viruses or other malicious software and to the fullest extent permitted by law disclaims all liability of any kind including liability for any damages, losses or costs resulting from damage to your computer or other property arising from access to the LRB Website, use of it or downloading material from it.
  22. The LRB does not warrant that the use of the LRB Website will be uninterrupted, and disclaims all liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred as a result of access to the LRB Website being interrupted, modified or discontinued.
  23. The LRB Website contains advertisements and promotional links to websites and other resources operated by third parties. While we would never knowingly link to a site which we believed to be trading in bad faith, the LRB makes no express or implied representations or warranties of any kind in respect of any third party websites or resources or their contents, and we take no responsibility for the content, privacy practices, goods or services offered by these websites and resources. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability for any damages or losses arising from access to such websites and resources. Any transaction effected with such a third party contacted via the LRB Website are subject to the terms and conditions imposed by the third party involved and the LRB accepts no responsibility or liability resulting from such transactions.
  24. The LRB disclaims liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred for unauthorised access or alterations of transmissions or data by third parties as consequence of visit to the LRB Website.
  25. While 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is currently provided free to subscribers to the print edition of the LRB, the LRB reserves the right to impose a charge for access to some or all areas of the LRB Website without notice.
  26. These terms and conditions are governed by and will be interpreted in accordance with English law and any disputes relating to these terms and conditions will be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales.
  27. The various provisions of these terms and conditions are severable and if any provision is held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction then such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the remaining provisions.
  28. If these terms and conditions are not accepted in full, use of the LRB Website must be terminated immediately.


Vol. 25 No. 11 · 5 June 2003

Search by issue:

How did they do it?

Donald MacKenzie (LRB, 22 May) misses an essential factor in his analysis of the downfall of Enron: the culpable ignorance of the financial services industry which hyped the company. MacKenzie notes, admiringly, that EnronOnline traded $100 billion worth of natural gas between November 1999 and June 2000. Since $100 buys roughly 1000 cubic metres of gas in the wholesale market, it follows that EnronOnline was claiming to have hosted trades in about 1000 billion cubic metres of gas. The total annual market for gas in the EU was about 450 billion cubic metres, mostly supplied in the form of long-term take-or-pay contracts which never went near a trading floor let alone the Internet. EnronOnline was thus claiming to be trading about four times the annual European market from its start-up. How did they do it? So far as one can see, by churning trades between fictitious agents, selling gas between themselves and, probably, by lying. They also used the cute device of adding the value of trades hosted to their revenue account. Most people in the energy business took Enron's hype with a bucket of salt. Unfortunately, bankers and investment analysts took it seriously – unable, it seems, to do simple sums.

Michael Prior
Hebden Bridge, Yorkshire

Et tu

It is still a surprise and disappointment to be reminded, as Leofranc Holford-Strevens reminds us (LRB, 22 May), that Julius Caesar did not say ‘Et tu, Brute’ as he died under 23 dagger thrusts on the Ides of March. Footnotes to Shakespeare make clear that this phrase was just a stage tag, but what did Caesar say? Suetonius and Cassius Dio give two versions, one that he said nothing, only grunted, the other that he said, as Holford-Strevens reports, kai su teknon. That is, his last words were in Greek. Why? And what did he mean? J.N. Adams, the author of the book reviewed by Holford-Strevens, says that it was a form of code-switching for magical or apotropaic purposes. Clearly, the standard translation, ‘You too, my child’ (in Robert Graves’s version), doesn’t quite convey code-switching for magical purposes, and Marcus Brutus, to whom the words were addressed, was a bit old to be ‘my child’ (Caesar was not his father, despite the rumours). James Russell, whom Adams quotes, argued that the first two words were common in Greek curses and curse tablets of the time, and Caesar and Brutus, both good Greek speakers, would have been familiar with this sub-literary argot. So Caesar may have died with a curse on his lips, and perhaps ‘child’ was meant contemptuously. But how to render that into English? Adams and Russell (and Holford-Strevens) offer: ‘To hell with you too, lad.’ Is this the best the English language can do? Suetonius could have helped: he wrote a ‘Guide to Greek Terms of Abuse’. Sadly, it is lost.

Rex Winsbury
London WC1

Aids and the Polio Vaccine

After nearly half a century, it is not surprising that Hilary Koprowski (Letters, 8 May) does not recall any local technician who would have had knowledge of the procedures for the preparation and administration of CHAT polio vaccine to 215,504 people in the Ruzizi Valley in the Congo early in 1958, or that he dismisses the account of one technician, Jacques Kanyama, as reported by Edward Hooper (LRB, 3 April). Few white researchers paid much attention to their African laboratory assistants, although Paul Osterrieth at least recalls Kanyama, a ‘low-level employee’, ‘with affection’. Koprowski’s memory has proved shaky on many crucial aspects of his early work on polio, both at the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia and in the Congo, and his rejection of Kanyama’s account is hardly convincing. Osterrieth also dismisses Kanyama’s recollections, describing them as ‘pure supposition’ and does not remember Philippe Elebe, the other technician Hooper spoke to.

It might jog their memories to look at the ‘unknown African assistant’ who figures in one of the photographs (‘Staff of Stanleyville Medical Laboratory in mid-1958’) in Hooper’s book, The River, or at the photo of the ‘two African assistants dismembering a dead chimp in the small “laboratory" at Camp Lindi in 1957’. These pictures make it clear that ‘African assistants’ were closely involved in many of the procedures carried out by the polio researchers, and that their testimony must be taken seriously.

Osterrieth also claims that, in Kisangani, ‘we had … no means of testing the purity, titre and safety of a viral vaccine.’ Yet his colleague Ghislane Courtois has specified the precise titre of the vaccine used in the Ruzizi mass trial, and that the vaccine was diluted sixty-fold with saline solution before feeding.

David Seddon
University of East Anglia

Do your homework

In his reassuring survey of the implications of developments in biogenetics (LRB, 22 May), Slavoj Žižek’s exuberance carries him too far when he says: ‘Ultimately, biogenetic intervention could render the idea of education meaningless.’ However fastidiously he takes his memory-enhancing drugs, he won’t win any quizzes unless he mugs up on the facts: this will take him less time than his opponent, for sure, but he won’t get away without doing any work. When he says that, ‘in good old Marxist terms, man is the totality of his/her social relations,’ and that ‘mind can emerge only from the network of social relations and material supplements,’ Žižek points up the limitations of what genetic manipulation is able to achieve: social relations, education among them, are beyond its control.

Malcolm Baker

Reactionary Danger

Lorna Scott Fox (LRB, 22 May) is dismissive of Victor Serge’s 1923 writings on Germany, describing them as ‘ultra-left’. Since Serge was writing for the Comintern press his analysis reflected the official line of the German Communist Party; only after revolutionary hopes collapsed did he permit himself some critical reflections in Clarté. The great merit of his writings was that they showed the impact of hyperinflation and political disintegration on everyday life in Germany, as captured in his portrait of the elderly intellectual coming back from the suburbs bent under the weight of sacks of potatoes, who as a result writes no more.

Scott Fox is wrong, too, to claim that in his last years ‘he had written off the working class for the time being.’ In late 1946, only a few months before he died, Serge wrote to the French socialist René Lefeuvre: ‘We shall get nowhere if we seem more preoccupied with criticising Stalinism than with defending the working class. The reactionary danger is still there, and in practice we shall often have to act alongside the Communists.’ Serge clearly still saw himself as an active member of the anti-Stalinist Left.

Ian Birchall
London N9

What Palmerston Knew

As E.S. Turner (LRB, 17 April) writes, the unblemished reputation of Charles Vaughan vanished overnight when the facts about his relationships with his pupils at Harrow were published and his ostensible motive for refusing the See of Rochester – fear of ambition – was exposed as hypocrisy. Vaughan was, however, described on his death as ‘the most useful man in his generation to the Church of England’, chiefly because he was one of the first to see that a degree from Oxbridge or Durham was not sufficient to train a clergyman. When he became vicar of Doncaster, he collected groups of young graduates who came to live with him in the vicarage. They studied New Testament Greek in the mornings and did parish visiting in the afternoons. They became known as ‘Vaughan’s Doves’ and included a future Archbishop of Canterbury. Vaughan’s work led to the establishment of theological colleges at the end of the 19th century.

Alfred Jowett

It has to be prose

In his review of Ciaran Carson’s version of the Inferno, Matthew Reynolds (LRB, 8 May) suggests that Carson does not always render the text neutrally into English but rather makes something out of it. This could not have been put more clearly. Something is indeed being made out of Dante’s poem: somebody else’s poem. We want the Inferno translated, and elegantly, too, but free of omissions and additions, and this English verse cannot do. It is a matter of arithmetic as much as aesthetics. Consider one prose and one verse translation of the second canto of the Inferno, lines 4-6:

ed io son uno

m’apparechiavo a sostener la guerra
sì del cammino e sì de la pietate
che ritrarrà la mente, che non erra.

The grammar gives ‘I was preparing myself’ for ‘m’apparechiavo.’ James Finn Cotter’s prose version gives ‘I readied myself.’ His complete rendering is

I, the only one,

readied myself to endure the battle
both of the journey and the pathos,
which flawless memory shall here record.

This is good, clear English, and does not add or subtract. ‘Guerra’ becomes ‘battle’ rather than ‘war’ because in English we do battle with circumstances. Memory ‘che non erra’, ‘which errs not’, becomes ‘flawless memory’. Only the word ‘here’ intrudes, reminding us that this is the beginning of a narrative by a returned traveller. I do not like ‘pathos’ for ‘pietate’: this is a modern abstraction for the poet’s earth-bound human pity, which Virgil scornfully dismisses as inappropriate in the presence of the justice of God (Canto XX, 26-30). Put back ‘pity’ and it’s difficult to see how the version could easily be improved.

Now consider a verse translation, the diligent terza rima of Dorothy Sayers:


Must gird me to the wars – rough travelling
And pity’s sharp assault upon the heart
Which memory shall record, unfaltering.

This doesn’t read badly, but it isn’t Dante. ‘Gird me to the wars’ is a poetic anachronism. ‘Rough travelling’ is quite wrong. Virgil did warn Dante that he would hear ‘hopeless shrieks’ but said nothing of physical obstacles to their progress (here Sayers is anticipating the narrative). She begins her second pentameter with only ‘pietate’ to translate, so this one word becomes ‘pity’s sharp assault upon the heart’. it’s a vivid phrase but corresponds to nothing in the text. The final word is not well chosen: a faltering memory can in the end arrive at the truth. ‘Unfaltering’ is not the equivalent of ‘unerring’ or of the Dantesque boast of a ‘faultless recall’. The word was chosen to pair with ‘travelling’ because Sayers wants to imitate Dante’s terza rima, a verse form not comfortably at home in a long English poem, and ‘unerring’ doesn’t fit because it lacks a syllable. A translator who has to choose words to fit a given rhyme scheme or metre, or put in words only to fill out a line, is not providing the service we need with a writer such as Dante. What we need, if we are trying to study the Divine Comedy, not skim through it on winter evenings, is a faithful version with notes and commentary. Only prose can do this.

John Glenn
Grantham, Lincolnshire

Hey Ho! The Pope Says No!

Hal Foster and Christian McEwen (Letters, 17 April) list slogans they spotted at anti-war demonstrations earlier this year. Glasgow Caledonian University, recognising the proliferation of such slogans and the value of preserving them, has established a website where anti and pro-war slogans will be collected. A listing of all the slogans sent to the site can be found at and further slogans can be submitted to the same address. A collection of anti-war songs can also be consulted at

John Powles
Glasgow Caledonian University

Read anywhere with the London Review of Books app, available now from the App Store for Apple devices, Google Play for Android devices and Amazon for your Kindle Fire.

Sign up to our newsletter

For highlights from the latest issue, our archive and the blog, as well as news, events and exclusive promotions.