Close

Terms and Conditions

These terms and conditions of use refer to the London Review of Books and the London Review Bookshop website (www.lrb.co.uk — 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.
Close

Letters

Vol. 32 No. 11 · 10 June 2010

Search by issue:

The End of the UK

David Runciman in his piece on the election refers to the ‘risible’ performance of the BNP (LRB, 27 May). If only. It is true that Nick Griffin failed dismally in Barking and that the party lost all of its councillors in Barking and Dagenham. But, largely by fighting on a wider front and tripling the number of its candidates, it doubled its national vote from 2005 to 1.9 per cent. Nearly two in every 100 votes went to a party described by both David Cameron and Alan Johnson as fascist. In 2005, the BNP put up 119 candidates and gained 0.74 per cent of the vote; in 2010 it put up 339 candidates and gained 1.9 per cent. On average, its candidates attracted 1647 votes each in 2005; in 2010, 1663 votes. Nearly twice as many voted for the BNP as voted for the Greens, and more voted for the BNP than voted for the Scottish National Party or Plaid Cymru, who won six and three seats respectively. In the 1930s, in the midst of a depression, when educational and living standards were far lower, Mosley’s Fascists failed to win a single council seat, and were unable to put up candidates in the general election of 1935. The BNP is doing far better. It now has 28 councillors – down from 56 in 2008 – and a member on the London Assembly, where it secured 5.3 per cent of the vote in 2008. It also has two members of the European Parliament, where it gained 6.2 per cent of the vote last year. The rise in BNP support has not been noticed because it did not win any seats. But it is now the fifth largest party in the United Kingdom.

Vernon Bogdanor
Brasenose College, Oxford

And what of the new New Labour? What a bunch of deadbeats – and so young. Deadbeats used to be old like Harold Macmillan.

Brian Lee
Great Hexham, Northumberland

The Shudder

In his fascinating piece on ‘Eliot and the Shudder’, Frank Kermode relates Tennyson’s ‘And like a guilty thing I creep/At earliest morning’ to Wordsworth’s ‘our mortal Nature/Did tremble like a guilty Thing surprised’ (LRB, 13 May). Surely, each of these also echoes a previous association of dawn, guilt and surprise, in Horatio’s description of King Hamlet’s ghost at cock-crow: ‘And then it started like a guilty thing/Upon a fearful summons’?

Tony Sharpe
Grange over Sands, Cumbria

T.S.Eliot (and Frank Kermode) make some acute points on Charmian’s final words in Antony and Cleopatra. I’m not sure, however, that their effect is quite as difficult to explain as Eliot claimed. The extraordinary resonance of Charmian’s expostulation, ‘Ah, soldier!’ lies, surely, in the pause, the single beat, that follows it before Charmian herself dies: an instant in which Cleopatra seems to come back as an echo, while Charmian wordlessly recalls her life, vivacity and nobility of spirit. A lesser, if more explicit, note of valedictory wonderment is made a few lines later by the Guard’s epitaph on Charmian:

O Caesar,
This Charmian lived but now; she stood and spake:
I found her trimming up the diadem
On her dead mistress; tremblingly she stood,
And on the sudden dropped.

Even in the moment preceding her own death, Charmian’s thoughts, we see, are of her mistress; one can imagine the force a talented actress could give to the words ‘Ah, soldier!’, which somehow manage both to lament Cleopatra’s suicide and celebrate her life.

Duncan Bush
Ynyswen, Powys

Mubarak’s Last Breath

Adam Shatz writes that Egyptians ‘fear that they will never know democracy because of the “American veto"’ (LRB, 27 May). It’s true that the US has been a less than enthusiastic backer of Egyptian political reform during the Mubarak years, but it’s still worth pointing out a few important, and indeed hopeful nuances of US policy. As Shatz notes, Mubarak managed to circumvent American pressure to democratise, thanks in part to Hamas’s victory in the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections, which took the wind from the sails of George W. Bush’s quixotic quest for democratic reform. After 2006, regime insiders relaxed, gloating that they ‘knew how to handle the US’. Yet Obama has proved far harder for Mubarak and his cronies to read. Gone is the two aspirins at bedtime Bush prescription for democracy, but it isn’t business as usual either. Obama has kept Mubarak at arm’s length, notably deflecting the Egyptian president’s offer to introduce him at his speech in Cairo in June 2009. When Obama spoke, he walked to the podium to the cadence of ‘Hail to the Chief’, and Mubarak was nowhere in sight – a marked contrast with his speech two months earlier in Ankara, where he addressed the Turkish parliament and was introduced by the Speaker. As many Egyptians remarked, the Cairo speech gave no comfort to Mubarak and his fellow kleptocrats. In another sign of a sterner, less tolerant US tone, Hillary Clinton has assailed the Egyptian government for its recent extension of the Emergency Law. This suggests a more skilful approach than in the Bush years, one that might help restore some vibrancy to Egypt’s dismal politics.

Augustus Richard Norton
Boston University

Men, men, men

What an oddly male drama Diarmaid MacCulloch purveys in his portrait of the Roman Inquisition (LRB, 13 May). To read his account, you would think the inquisitors thought about men, conversed with men, interrogated men, burned men’s books and sometimes burned men themselves without giving a thought to the myriad women who began to make a noise on the chaotic scene of the Counter-Reformation. Only at the very end, when MacCulloch gives the final word to the source material, do we hear something that sounds like the return of the repressed: ‘By inflicting pain and torment on women, who are admittedly little different from brutish beasts, you may appear as guardians of the Christian faith.’

Lotte Folke Kaarsholm
Copenhagen

What We’re about to Receive

Jeremy Harding’s article on food sustainability brings to mind the work of Lester Brown on the impact that a combination of population growth, unequal distribution and climate change may have on current cultures of over-consumption (LRB, 13 May). Brown rather breathlessly predicts a global shift in economic power from net food-importing nations – which have long benefited from agriculture’s poor terms of trade – to exporters, who in his view will soon be able to dictate to global markets for the first time.

If Brown is correct, the winners would be in the Americas (Argentina and Brazil especially, as well as the US and Canada), Australasia and Central Asia. The biggest losers would be small, overpopulated nations in Asia and Europe, notably Japan, Singapore and, potentially, the UK. But it would also be disastrous for most African nations, whose food production systems are so inefficient that they are net importers, even though the majority of their populations are farmers.

Reduced consumption is not an option there, and after decades of neglecting agriculture, a shift towards state-subsidised food self-sufficiency would be the most sensible response. Malawi’s current fertiliser subsidy programme is a shining example of how this can be done even in a very poor country. Whether such a phosphorus-dependent strategy is economically or environmentally sustainable in the long term, however, remains to be seen.

Crucially, the same is true of hydroponic production in the UK, such as Thanet Earth. The economic and environmental cost (in terms of carbon emissions) of producing tomatoes under stadium lights is far greater than that of shipping them from Africa. The concept of food miles – as opposed to, say, food carbon units – is fundamentally flawed. Imported fruit and vegetables usually taste better and help to reduce the inequality that lies at the heart of the impending global food crisis.

In the present, European agricultural subsidies and import tariffs, under the Common Agricultural Policy, remain a horrendous impediment to agricultural growth and poverty reduction in Africa. A new focus on food sustainability in the UK sounds like a good idea in principle, but if it is based on environmentally harmful production and trade barriers that perpetuate global poverty, it could make worse the problem it seeks to address.

David Hall-Matthews
Leeds University

Had it not been for Lead Belly

I was glad to see Eric Hobsbawm give the late folk/blues great Huddie Ledbetter, better known as Lead Belly, credit as the inspiration for Lonnie Donegan’s recording of ‘Rock Island Line’ (LRB, 27 May). Newly released from Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola, he first learned the song from Kelly Pace, a convict at the Cummins Prison Farm in Gould, Arkansas, whom he encountered in 1934 while working as a driver for the musicologist John Lomax, then travelling through the South collecting songs for the Library of Congress. Lomax recorded Pace leading a group of seven men, one of them doing an imitation whistle. When they heard their song played back later, they threw down their hats and beamed with pride. Lead Belly liked the song as well, and before he quit work that day he had learned it.

Years later he would add his own introduction, which Donegan copied: ‘I got cows, I got sheep, I got goats, I got horses.’ During the Second World War Lead Belly sometimes switched to the more topical, ‘I got guns, I got tanks, I got bombs, I got Jeeps.’ The Beatles acknowledged the Donegan recording as one of their main influences. George Harrison told his publisher, Brian Roylance, that since Donegan’s repertoire consisted mostly of Lead Belly songs, there would have been no British rock scene had it not been for Lead Belly. ‘No Lead Belly, no Beatles,’ said George Harrison.

John Reynolds
New York

Through the Northwest Passage

Thomas Jones notes that in recent times the Northwest Passage has been navigated by several icebreakers and nuclear submarines (LRB, 27 May). It does not, however, require quite such heavy-duty vessels. Willy de Roos achieved the passage from east to west in his 45-foot steel yacht Williwaw; Jeff MacInnis and Wade Rowland achieved a west-east crossing in their 18-foot catamaran, Perception, in 1986; and David Scott Cowper, over three seasons, went through in a 42-foot converted lifeboat, the Mabel E.Holland, reaching the Bering Straits in August 1989.

Mike Bender
Exeter University

In a Cleft Stick

I may have overstated the likely potential of the Equality Act 2010 (Letters, 27 May). It appears that employers have only a power, not a duty, to engage in positive discrimination in recruitment and promotion. Moreover, caste discrimination will only be made unlawful by means of secondary legislation after August if a report from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research indicates that such a change is warranted.

Chris Purnell
Orpington, Kent

Mistake

The illustration on John Barrell’s review of the Paul Sandby show at the Royal Academy was mislabelled, muddling Boxley with Bexley (LRB, 13 May). The caption should have read: A View of Vintners at Boxley, Kent, with Mr Whatman’s Turkey Mill (1794).

Editor, ‘London Review’

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.