Latest news with #French-speakers
Scotsman
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Scotsman
Whispers in the Glen by Sue Lawrence review: 'an unusual novel'
Sign up to our Arts and Culture newsletter, get the latest news and reviews from our specialist arts writers Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... This is an engaging and agreeable novel, an unusual one, too, with a strong narrative and for the most part pleasant and credible characters. It is set mostly in Glen Clova in Angus, though some chapters are set in France. It has a double time-frame, the story being set partly in the First World War, partly in the Second. What is unusual is that we move between these two periods from the beginning, and it is not immediately clear why the author has chosen this arrangement. It soon makes sense, however, and proves very effective. Glen Clova | Getty Images In the first chapter the two main protagonists are middle-aged, neither married. Effie - Euphemia - is the village schoolmistress while Nell is serving as the wartime postie, also helping in the bar at the local hotel. Effie, though a kind and understanding teacher, is grumpy at home. You soon suspect that something has gone wrong in her life. Nell seems much more at ease, much happier. Their mother is long, somewhat mysteriously dead. Their father, the local dominie, is shown in the First World War passages to have been harsh and disagreeable. Is there something mysterious about his wife's death? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Somewhat surprisingly, both Effie and Nell are fluent French-speakers. In the First World War passages this is soon explained: Nell is working as a nurse in a field hospital in France, the work and conditions being well described. One officer, himself from Angus, is disagreeable, but put in his place by a crippled French chef. Meanwhile, back in Glen Clova, Effie spends part of the First World War working on an aunt's form. She has a harsh experience which colours or rather discolours her life. Then, in the Second World War, there is a plane crash at the top of the Glen, an event which comes with consequences. However, the author eschews most violent drama; this is a very sane novel. Lawrence has evident sympathy and affection for her characters, and the evocation of rural Scotland a hundred years ago is engaging, pleasing with its echoes of JM Barrie's Thrums, though there is none of the sentimentality for so long associated with the Kailyard. Sensibly, Lawrence has chosen not to attempt to try to reproduce the language of rural Scots a hundred years ago, and to write in Standard English. Nevertheless, her feeling for the life of the Angus Glens rings agreeably true. This is a quiet novel, agreeably persuasive, and this makes its occasional violent, even vicious, moments all the more telling. It is, I suppose, a feminist book, though not stridently so. There are two deplorable men, the girls' father and a Kirriemuir man, the officer first met by Nell in France who has more than a touch of the villain about him. He is necessary to the plot, and, though unpleasant, not exaggeratedly so. In general the novel is suffused by a sense of decency and kindness, rare in fiction today, and it brings this off without a trace of sentimentality. In short, Lawrence has written an admirable novel with persuasive characters, the treatment of the two sisters being as convincing as it is agreeable. If the ending proves a bit on the sentimental side, its generosity is convincing.
Otago Daily Times
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Otago Daily Times
Galloping away from The Donald
The dictionary defines a horse whisperer as "someone who is skilled at training horses using gentle, non-violent methods based on understanding horse behaviour and psychology." By that standard, the only Trump-whisperer in Europe is Vladimir Putin (although Hungary's Viktor Orban and Italy's Giorgia Meloni might get bit-parts in the movie). The other far-right parties in big European countries (Rassemblement National in France, Alternative fur Deutschland in Germany, PiS in Poland, Reform in the UK) don't know which way to look. They know that the US Republican Party is in the same tradition, but European history has also taught them to recognise fascism when they see it. They all do well in elections by being fascist-adjacent, but they start to shed votes if they get too explicit about their ideas. Nowhere do they get more than a-third of the votes, whereas Donald Trump got more than half in the United States this time. They cannot follow him where he seems to be going, and many of them wouldn't even want to. A better measure of how Trumpism does in the export market will be found in the other parts of the Anglosphere, and happily there are two elections in that zone in the next two weeks, in Canada and Australia. They couldn't be further apart geographically, but with the great exception of the French fact in Quebec they couldn't be closer in their history and politics. The French fact can be ignored on this occasion, since all francophones are united in thinking that it's bad enough living as a large minority (22% of the population) in a country that is familiar with the concept of language rights and in some parts is legally or at least de facto bilingual. The threat of annexation by the United States is existential for French-speakers, who would be only a minuscule fraction (2.6%) of the enlarged country's population. The prospect has converted almost every francophone into a devout Canadian nationalist, at least for the time being. The beauty of this experiment is that just three months ago the opposition party in both countries was fairly far right and becoming more so and that both parties were led by men who could reasonably be characterised as Trump-whisperers, or at least Trump wannabes. Most importantly, both parties expected to win the impending elections in a walk. Both prime ministerial candidates, Peter Dutton, of the conservative Coalition in Australia, and Pierre Poilievre, of the Conservative Party in Canada, concentrated on Trump's main themes: immigration, crime, an end to the "indocrination" of children in schools, and big cuts to "wasteful" government services. Dutton even proposed an agency like Elon Musk's DOGE. Indeed, while Poilievre has had great difficulty in taking his distance from Trump, Dutton has not even cut the umbilical cord. Not only did he promise to cancel offshore windfarms (a Trump obsession), but he even echoed The Donald's claim that they harm whales. Australian pollster Peter Lewis says simply that people think Dutton is "too much like Trump". There is no doubt that it was Trump and only Trump who turned the elections in both Canada and Australia from surefire victories into certain defeats for the right-wing parties. When Trump was inaugurated on January 20 of this year, both conservatives were far ahead of their opponents, but their numbers began to slide almost immediately. In Australia, a safe distance away from the United States, other factors were also in play, but a swing of almost 10 points in three months suggests that the Trump factor was decisive. In Canada, where there was a swing of more than 20 points in two months, there can be no doubt that it was Trump who enabled Poilievre to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. To explain this we must move from the realm of facts and calculations to the slippery world of motives and emotions, because it seems pretty clear that these votes did not shift because of self-interest or ideological conviction. They were mostly driven, I think, by revulsion at the character of the man Donald Trump. In Canada there was also a change of leader from the deeply unpopular Justin Trudeau to the relatively unknown Mark Carney, which lured some people back into the big Liberal tent. There was certainly outrage at Trump's threats to crush the economy and take over the country, which doubtless moved more votes to Carney. But none of that applies to Australia. There it is simple guilt by association that has brought Peter Dutton low and will probably cost him the election. It's unworthy of me, I know, but I take a certain comfort from that. • Gwynne Dyer is an independent London journalist.
Boston Globe
02-03-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Trudeau to bring up Trump's threat to annex Canada in meeting with King Charles
Charles is the head of state in Canada, which is a member of the British Commonwealth of former colonies. Overall, the antiroyal movement in Canada is small, but the silence of the monarch on Trump's threats have spurred talk in recent days. Advertisement Former Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said 'for Canadians disappointed that King Charles has not commented' on Trump's threats he can only act on the advice of Canada's prime minister. 'The Government of Canada should ask the Head of State to underscore Canadian sovereignty,' Kenney posted on X. The king, who met Sunday with Ukrainian President Though Canadians are somewhat indifferent to the monarchy, many had great affection for the late Queen Elizabeth, whose silhouette marks their coins. She was the head of state for 45% of Canada's existence and visited the country 22 times as monarch. Visits by Charles over the years have attracted sparse crowds 'Canadians will need to decide what purpose King Charles III serves as King of Canada if he can't even speak up for our sovereignty,' Artur Wilczynski, a former Canadian public servant, posted on X. Abolishing the monarchy would mean changing the constitution. That's an inherently risky undertaking, given how delicately it is engineered to unite a nation of 41 million people that embraces English-speakers, French-speakers, Indigenous tribes and a constant flow of new immigrants.
Yahoo
02-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trudeau to bring up Trump's threat to annex Canada in meeting with King Charles
TORONTO (AP) — Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will meet with King Charles III, the country's head of state, on Monday where he will discuss U.S. President Donald Trump's threats to make Canada the 51st state. The king has come under criticism in Canada for being silent about Trump's threats to annex Canada. Trudeau said in London on Sunday he will discuss matters of importance to Canadians with Charles and said "nothing seems more important to Canadians right now than standing up for our sovereignty and our independence as a nation.' See for yourself — The Yodel is the go-to source for daily news, entertainment and feel-good stories. By signing up, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy. Charles is the head of state in Canada, which is a member of the British Commonwealth of former colonies. Overall, the antiroyal movement in Canada is small, but the silence of the monarch on Trump's threats have spurred talk in recent days. Former Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said 'for Canadians disappointed that King Charles has not commented' on Trump's threats he can only act on the advice of Canada's prime minister. 'The Government of Canada should ask the Head of State to underscore Canadian sovereignty,' Kenney posted on X. The king, who met Sunday with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has invited Trump to come to Scotland for a state visit. Though Canadians are somewhat indifferent to the monarchy, many had great affection for the late Queen Elizabeth, whose silhouette marks their coins. She was the head of state for 45% of Canada's existence and visited the country 22 times as monarch. Visits by Charles over the years have attracted sparse crowds 'Canadians will need to decide what purpose King Charles III serves as King of Canada if he can't even speak up for our sovereignty,' Artur Wilczynski, a former Canadian public servant, posted on X. Abolishing the monarchy would mean changing the constitution. That's an inherently risky undertaking, given how delicately it is engineered to unite a nation of 41 million people that embraces English-speakers, French-speakers, Indigenous tribes and a constant flow of new immigrants.
