
Horrible Histories creator Terry Deary: ‘What's the use of universities?'
This will come as no surprise to anyone familiar with Horrible Histories. Those books, 70-odd titles that have together sold some 30 million copies, have enlivened great tracts of the past for generations of children by relaying with irresistible delight the viscera of history and the experience of the common man. In them, monarchs and world leaders are usually depicted as monsters or figures of fun: the Romans are 'evil'; the Tudors, tyrants. Deary reserves a particular loathing for Elizabeth I, and he is not at all a fan of the British Empire. 'I get a lot of abuse for it,' he tells me; he's even been accused of 'poisoning the minds of children. But I can't believe anyone would possibly justify the British Empire.'
Thirty-two years after the publication of the first Horrible Histories book, Deary says he's done with writing children's books. 'I've written hundreds of them. There's another mountain to climb now.' Actually, I'm a Murderer is the first instalment in what he hopes will develop into a long-running series (he's already written book two) featuring John Brown, an assassin-for-hire in 1970s Sunderland, where Deary grew up.
The premise inverts the classic crime thriller setup: we know whodunnit from the beginning; the fun lies in the protracted game of cat and mouse between Brown and the police who, in the first book at least, Deary paints as incompetent, sexist and bigoted. 'Only the men,' he corrects me – the hero of the novel, Aline, is a policewoman fighting her repulsive, handsy colleague for promotion.
'Female police are underrated. When I published a murder mystery for young adults 20 years ago, the editor made me tone down the incompetence of the book's bent policeman,' he adds. 'I had to make the police look better and focus on solving the mystery. I don't think you would get that today.'
In fact, Deary is quite a fan of the police, despite having been 'beaten blue' by them when he was a 'naughty nipper'; his dad ran a butcher's shop and Deary says his impoverished childhood 'in a postwar slum' taught him 'how real people lived'. I ask him what he thinks of the Metropolitan Police today, hit by a string of appalling scandals. 'Police are human beings. No one can live up to the expectations that are placed on the police.'
Deary, who lives in County Durham with his wife, Jenny, with whom he has one grown-up daughter, was already a successful children's author when he was commissioned to do a history joke book in the early 1990s. He had begun writing in 1976 while working as a drama teacher in Suffolk. He maintains he didn't know much history at the time, although he studied it at A-Level. But then, his intention was never to educate.
'I didn't set out to enlighten their little minds or even get them to read,' he says. 'That just happened.' His main influence was his previous career as an actor: he had spent a few years in the early 1970s with Theatr Powys, in Wales. 'The aim of drama is to answer one question only – why do people behave the way they do? I applied that to my books. Look how they behaved in the past and learn from that.'
Today, Horrible Histories is part of the cultural landscape – widely read in schools and embraced by the middle classes. 'Isn't that sickening?' says Deary. 'It's like Mick Jagger. He presents himself as anti-Establishment and then he accepts a knighthood. I hope I never sell out like that.'
Fair enough, but the brand is already enormously lucrative – there are theatre, film and television adaptations, and even a Horrible Histories interactive cruise along the Thames, for which Deary writes the voiceover. Is he worried that the brand's original rebel spirit is becoming diluted? 'Horrible Histories is not my brand. I just write the books,' he says. 'And I take no credit for the spin-offs.'
He rejects, too, the suggestion that Horrible Histories inculcate an inherently flippant attitude towards the past. 'You forget how boring history books for children were before I came along. Endless parents tell me their child never read a book until they picked up Horrible Histories. Although when people tell me that thanks to my books they studied history at university, I say 'Don't blame me, mate', because what use are universities?'
Deary can come across as a bit of a throwback 1980s anarchist. He's famously against the education system, partly because he was caned repeatedly at his primary school. 'I'm against schooling. Not against education,' he clarifies. 'But you need to get rid of the muppets in Whitehall who write the curriculum which applies to every child in this country, when they wouldn't know a child from Newcastle or Sunderland if it thumped them on the kneecap.'
He spits at whatever Labour might be planning to address this: it launched a review of the school curriculum at the end of last year. 'It's just tokenism, sorry. You need to get rid of it.' I assume, then, that he is not too concerned by the drop in students reading history at university? He himself never got the chance to go: his teachers suggested when he was 18 that he 'get a job down the pits'; instead, he worked at the electricity board. 'People don't have to waste taxpayers' money spending four years going to this place called university and not working when they can read my books [instead],' he says. I think he means it. 'But it's not my problem. I'm a book writer.'
But surely, I suggest, the facts and intellectual rigour taught at university are important tools both for understanding the counter-imperialist view of history he favours and also for combating the growing threat of AI-generated misinformation? In lieu of an answer, Deary tells me how when people hear about a mother who lost her children in a bombing raid during the Second World War, they assume it took place in London or Coventry. 'But it took place in Dresden, too. Everyone comes up with a British-educated answer. But it happened to them as well as us.'
I try again. What does Deary think about the ways in which we are rethinking our imperial past – the growing acknowledgment of the extent to which modern Britain was built on profits from the slave trade; the Rhodes Must Fall movement, which argues for the removal of the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, Oxford? That, he says, is 'actually quite a good idea. Although they should be arguing to take all the statues down, including Lord bloody Nelson in Trafalgar Square. But it's a minority view. Imperialists are taking over the country.'
Including, perhaps, in Sunderland – Deary left the city in the early 1970s, but maintains close links – where Reform won 27 per cent of the vote in the last election. Why does he think that happened? 'Because Farage is a big personality,' he says. 'People aren't voting for his policies, but for the man. So don't ask me to condemn my Sunderland friends.' Quite the opposite, I say. Isn't it only because such voters feel let down by the Establishment that they find themselves drawn to Reform in the first place? 'That, I admit, does sway people,' Deary says. 'They think the Conservatives have had their chance but they mucked it up, so we'll try Labour. Oh, they aren't doing so well, so we'll try a third option.'
Deary is a tremendous force in publishing – and proud of it: he points out that the paperback edition of his recent nonfiction book A History of Britain in Ten Enemies topped the bestseller charts. 'Not bad for a lad from Sunderland, eh?' He has no plans to stop, nor any intention of toning things down. 'I'm an entertainer, not an academic. And if I don't entertain people, they won't engage.'
Actually, I'm a Murderer by Terry Deary (Constable, £18.99) is out on June 12
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Why did Lucy Connolly receive a 31-month sentence for Southport tweet?
The case of Lucy Connolly has sparked intense debate since she was jailed for inciting racial hatred online following the Southport attacks, with some criticising her sentence as excessive. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said Connolly's sentence was 'harsher than the sentences handed down for bricks thrown at police or actual rioting'. Here, the PA news agency explores her case and 31-month prison sentence. – What offence did Lucy Connolly commit? Connolly pleaded guilty in September to a charge of inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing 'threatening or abusive' written material on X, formerly Twitter. On July 29 last year, she posted: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the b******* for all I care… if that makes me racist so be it.' The post was viewed 310,000 times in three and a half hours before she deleted it. The charge, contrary to section 19(1) of the Public Order Act 1986, said that she 'published and distributed written material on the social media platform X, formerly Twitter, which was threatening, abusive or insulting with the intent thereby to stir up racial hatred or whereby, having regard to all the circumstances, racial hatred was likely to be stirred up thereby'. The 1986 Act covers offences around incitement, public disorder and harassment, and covers both online and offline offences. – How was Lucy Connolly sentenced? Connolly admitted a 'category 1A' offence, meaning that her culpability was deemed to be in 'category A', and the harm was in 'category one' – both the highest categories. Guidelines on how to sentence offenders for several crimes are published by the Sentencing Council, an independent body which is led by the judiciary. The guidance for racial hatred offences states that those who commit such a crime are to be deemed to have high culpability if they demonstrate one or more of three factors. These are using a 'position of trust, authority or influence to stir up hatred', showing an 'intention to incite serious violence' and demonstrating 'persistent activity'. A publication is considered to cause 'category one' harm if it 'directly encourages activity which threatens or endangers life', and there is 'widespread dissemination'. The maximum sentence for the offence is seven years behind bars. Defendants who commit category 1A offences can be sentenced to between two and six years in prison, with the 'starting point' for sentences – the point used before aggravating and mitigating factors are considered – being three years. – How did the sentencing judge categorise the offence? During sentencing, Judge Melbourne Inman KC said both prosecution and defence barristers agreed that the case involved a 'category 1A' offence. He said the timing of the post was a 'further significant aggravating factor' to the offence, which came amid a 'particularly sensitive social climate'. He added that in the three and a half hours between Connolly publishing and deleting the post, it was 'widely read', having been viewed '310,000 times with 940 reposts, 58 quotes and 113 bookmarks'. In mitigation, Judge Inman said Connolly had no previous convictions, that it was her first time in prison, that she did not repeat her statement and deleted the post, and that she 'sent some messages to the effect that violence was not the answer'. He also said he accepted she still 'very keenly' felt the loss of her own child several years ago, and that she regretted her actions. But he also found that Connolly had 'little insight into, or acceptance of' her offending. He said: 'Whilst you may well have understood the grief of those who suffered their own tragic losses in Southport, you did not send a message of understanding and comfort but rather an incitement to hatred.' He added that the sentence he would have imposed after a trial was one of three and a half years – 42 months – but then reduced this by a quarter because of Connolly's early guilty plea, resulting in the final sentence of 31 months. – What happened when Connolly appealed against her sentence? At the Court of Appeal in May, judges dismissed a legal challenge against her sentence. In a written judgment, Lord Justice Holroyde, said: 'There is no arguable basis on which it could be said that the sentence imposed by the judge was manifestly excessive.' Lawyers for Connolly had said that Judge Inman 'miscategorised' the offence, claiming her culpability should have been deemed as 'category B', and that the mitigating factors outweighed the aggravating features. But Lord Justice Holroyde, sitting with Mr Justice Goss and Mr Justice Sheldon, ruled that Connolly 'willingly pleaded guilty' to the offence and that Judge Inman was 'entitled, and indeed obviously correct, to categorise the case as he did'. Connolly's husband, Conservative councillor Ray Connolly branded the decision 'shocking and unfair'. The Northampton town councillor, and former West Northamptonshire district councillor, said his wife had 'paid a very high price for making a mistake'. But Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer defended it earlier this year. He was asked about Connolly's case after her Court of Appeal application against her jail term was dismissed. Asked during Prime Minister's Questions whether her imprisonment was an 'efficient or fair use' of prison, Sir Keir said: 'Sentencing is a matter for our courts and I celebrate the fact that we have independent courts in this country. 'I am strongly in favour of free speech, we've had free speech in this country for a very long time and we protect it fiercely. 'But I am equally against incitement to violence against other people. I will always support the action taken by our police and courts to keep our streets and people safe.' – What has the response been to her case? Lord Young of Acton, founder and director of the Free Speech Union, which funded Connolly's legal challenge, said: 'The fact that Lucy Connolly has spent more than a year in prison for a single tweet that she quickly deleted and apologised for is a national scandal.' Conservative and Reform politicians have decried what they call 'two-tier justice' in her case comparing it with that of Ricky Jones, a suspended Labour councillor who was found not guilty of encouraging violent disorder at an anti-racism rally in the wake of the Southport murders. Lawyers have said the cases should not be conflated as Connolly and Jones faced allegations of a different nature – and Jones faced trial where Connolly, having pleaded guilty, did not. Reform UK's deputy leader Richard Tice has also proposed 'Lucy's Bill' after Connolly's case in Parliament, which would allow people to mount mass appeals against punishments they deem to be too severe or lenient.


The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Watchdog urged to probe ‘dangerous shambles' of Afghan relocation data breaches
A watchdog has been urged to investigate the 'dangerous shambles' of Afghan relocation data breaches after the Ministry of Defence reportedly admitted more than previously known. A freedom of information request by the BBC revealed there have been 49 data breaches in the past four years, including four already known to the public. Seven breaches were serious enough to be reported to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), three of which had not been made public, the broadcaster reported. Those three included one in 2021 and two in 2022, the same year a major leak prompted the Government to obtain an unprecedented superinjunction barring journalists from reporting it. Sean Humber, a lawyer at Leigh Day, which acts for Afghan citizens affected by previous breaches, said the latest reports are 'shocking' and confirm the MoD 'appears to be institutionally incapable of keeping personal data safe'. He said: 'These data breaches betray a cavalier attitude to keeping such sensitive information safe as well as a complete disregard for the potentially life and death consequences of failing to do so. 'The Information Commissioner's Office must now roll up its sleeves and carry out a thorough and immediate investigation of what appears to be systemic failures of data protection policies, procedures or practices by the Ministry of Defence. This dangerous shambles cannot be allowed to continue. 'All those affected must be notified of the breach of their personal data, including the personal data affected, without further delay and appropriate steps taken to ensure their safety.' Adnan Malik, of Barings Law, which represents 1,500 affected people, said: 'This represents a deeply alarming data failure and the recent 49 Ministry of Defence breaches make clear that the Afghan case was not an isolated error but part of a wider and troubling pattern of negligence. 'Transparency is not optional; it is critical for protecting individuals, maintaining public trust, and ensuring that lessons are learned to prevent future breaches.' The MoD did not provide any details of the nature of each breach. Last month, a High Court judge lifted the gagging order relating to the major breach, which saw the details of 18,714 applicants for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) scheme released in 2022. When the breach was discovered more than a year later in August 2023, the MoD was granted an unprecedented gagging order amid fears the Taliban could target would-be refugees for reprisals. It also saw the establishment of a secret £850 million scheme, the Afghanistan Response Route (ARR), to bring thousands of those affected to the UK. Arap was responsible for relocating Afghan nationals who had worked for or with the UK Government and were therefore at risk of reprisals once the Taliban returned to power in Kabul in 2021. An MoD spokesperson said: 'We take data security extremely seriously and are committed to ensuring that any incidents are dealt with properly, and that we follow our legal duties. 'All incidents that meet the threshold under UK data protection laws are referred to the Information Commissioner's Office and any lesser incidents are examined internally to ensure lessons are learned.' The ICO said it continues to engage with the MoD to be 'assured that they have made the required improvements'.


The Sun
14 minutes ago
- The Sun
Love Island's Cach reveals Toni is ‘struggling' with fame after winning show and sparks concern about their future
LOVE Island star Cach Mercer has revealed Toni Laites is finding fame overwhelming as he admitted she'll eventually go back to America. The dancer spoke on the Old & Bald podcast after the couple scooped the £50k prize earlier this month. 6 6 6 6 Cach said that former Las Vegas waitress Toni is being mobbed everywhere she goes and is struggling with the attention from young fans, after viewers were gripped by her rocky love story in the ITV2 villa. Cach said he has been keeping a close eye on her every day. However, one comment has sparked that Toni could be heading back to America soon, leaving question marks over their blossoming relationship. Asked how things are outside of the villa, Cach said: "It's going well, I feel like feelings are strong as they were in the villa. "I've been spending every day with her since obviously she's here by herself, so making sure she's OK and stuff. "But she's struggling a bit with the attention aspect. "Because before she worked a normal job, and had no followig, she's never had this amount of attention in her life. "I've let her know that we've just come off one of the biggest shows in the UK and everybody in the UK watches it." Cach added: "Once she goes back to America I don't think it will be that bad ... it will be more like she can breath. "Like we went shopping the other day and she gets swarmed by the little girls like people calling her 'icon'. Cach and Toni WIN Love Island and bag £50k as raunchiest ever series ends "She loves it as well but when she comes away from it she deeps it and gets overwhelmed, like not being able to do shopping. "She'll get used to it and I feel like it won't be this tense for too long." Best pals Shakira and Toni battled it out to win Love Island with their partners Harry and Cach. Toni was the show's first American bombshell and fans loved her rollercoaster journey on the show. Just a few weeks before the final, Toni split from Cach to rekindle with her old flame Harrison - not knowing he had been intimate with Casa Amor's Lauren. After just one day, he U-turned yet again - and ended up leaving the villa when Lauren was voted out. Despite Cach breaking down in tears over the embarrassment of his public split from Toni, he forgave her. They started up their relationship once again and on their final night in the villa said "I love you". 6 6