A Man of the Empire

1865-1936. A man who served the Empire. Good man, that Kipling.

Back in 1995, Rudyard Kipling was voted Britain's favourite poet and the favourite poem was Kipling's, 'IF'. No doubt voted for by people who have not read his work, apart from 'IF'. Fast forward to 2015 and the nation's favourite poet morphs into TS Elliot. Quite a change in subjective taste- go figure. 

To be honest, I'm not a fan of  Kiplin's prose or poetry, or for any of his work for that matter. Tis a matter of taste, of course, and much of Kipling's work is anachronistic and has not travelled well. It is interesting to read his work pre-Great War and subsequently. I will have more to say on this matter later on in this post. 

Kipling, in my opinion, was a poor poet prone to pomposity and moralising and yet, all the same, had the knack of juxtaposing platitudes in a pleasing manner. Perhaps I'm being unfair, some of his prose ascends to the sublime although much of his work is simply silly, especially to the modern mind and sense. Read the following and tell me if I'm wrong: "I heard the knives behind me, but I durns't face my man, Nor I don't know where I went to, cause I didn't stop to see, Till I heard a beggar squealing out for quarter as he ran, And I thought I knew the voice and- it was me." Kipling had the annoying habit of dropping haitches and the ending, 'g' when portraying the working class soldiery. Tis a condescending and distracting trait that adds nothing to the composition, so in the quoted version I have erred on the side of correct English usage. It is a rendering of his social class, and of his time and we are apt to forget how dripping in social class, Britain, and especially England, was just two generations ago. Lest us, not us forget that Kipling was a colonial living in India, in what polite English society, of late 19th century, would describe as 'rude and quaintly, barbaric'. Flies, dysentery and the damned heat were never fashionable. And of course, there was the smell. Imagine the crowded Indian bazaar/bizarre of the late 19th century and perhaps you can gain a glimpse of the noisome atrocity that assails the olfactory sense, then and even now. 

It is interesting to note that Kipling has remained 'popular' with non-literary folk and despised by those with literary pretension- quite a legacy. Those on the 'left' hate him for his jingoist imperialism irrespective of any intrinsic poetic merit. The views of Kipling are well portrayed in his verse and reflect a 'Kipling' who was very much a man of his time: A Victorian. Not only a Victorian but also a member of the ascendant race which ruled the world; heady stuff. However, as a wretched colonial, he never had the cultural merits of polite London society. He was always considered a 'rude barbarian' moderately burnished with a societal tan. This may have been part of his underlying problem in polite Victorian society. It was said that his 'tan' was more than skin deep, hinting of past ancestral indiscretions with the local 'duskies'.

Kipling's poetry changed as the world changed. But like the true Victorian he was, he failed to comprehend that change and was left adrift in a Modern World where certainty had perished on Flanders field.  Indeed, his poetry undergoes a modification after the Great War. Before that time, it is bold, sure-footed and on the side of god, king, and country. Kipling's god is a good god and punishes hubris and his king never strays from his queen's bedchamber.  The war changed him. Idealism was lost and he was smart enough to realise that 'right' was no longer enough to prevail, the only thing that really mattered was 'might'. This has always been the case and yet is not always appreciated, especially in times of prolonged peace. After the war, a strain of cynicism and bitterness enters his work. Gone is the certainty of the privileged middle-class man living in an Anglo-centric world. What enters is bewilderment and incomprehension. Although the British Empire had prevailed in the greatest war ever known, it had inexplicably become weakened and superseded by 'lesser breeds'. His earlier work is like the Empire at its Greatest: grandiose, immensely confident and without error. Post-1918: his foot and intellect flounder in the intellectual mud of 1917. I suspect that a great part of his intellectual sinking and demise has, in the main, been attuned to the death of his son on the 1915 Western Front battlefield- his son's body was never recovered. 

Kipling acknowledged the reality of a post-Great War world but could not offer an anodyne or even a ready anecdote. However, the post-Great War World was about to get a lot worse......Ain't da the sad 
truth.

 Anyway, here is the poem, 'IF', in its entirety. In my opinion, it is cloying and 'preachy' although some of the couplets are very seductive at the emotional level. Please judge and let me know what you think.

IF

If you can keep your head when all about you   

    Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,   

If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,

    But make allowance for their doubting too;   

If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,

    Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,

Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,

    And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream—and not make dreams your master;   

    If you can think—and not make thoughts your aim;   

If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster

    And treat those two impostors just the same;   

If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken

    Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,

Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,

    And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings

    And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,

And lose, and start again at your beginnings

    And never breathe a word about your loss;

If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew

    To serve your turn long after they are gone,   

And so hold on when there is nothing in you

    Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,   

    Or walk with Kings—nor lose the common touch,

If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,

    If all men count with you, but none too much;

If you can fill the unforgiving minute

    With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,   

Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,   

    And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!

The Great Filter

According to the Drake equation (formulated in 1961) there should be at least 50,000,000 intelligent technological civilisations in our Milky Way galaxy. More recent calculations, based on modern cosmological observations, give a more conservative estimate of 15,600,000 civilisations. Regardless, the theory and the mathematics predict substantial numbers of planets, within our own galaxy, supporting advanced technological life. Through the SETI program, vast resources have been spent in trying to identify intelligent life in the universe but so far to no avail. I have discussed this topic before in a post titled: ‘Where are the Little Green Men’. You might want to acquaint yourselves with the discussion engendered there before continuing with this post. In this post, I would like to concentrate on one specific issue: ‘The Great Filter’.

The ‘Great Filter’ idea was first proposed, not by a scientist, but the economist, Robin Hanson, in 1996. His thesis is an attempt to address the Fermi paradox. The Fermi paradox deals with the apparent contradiction regarding the high probability of advanced life in the universe and the total lack of evidence for said life. Hanson's proposal states that developing life, simple and intelligent, is subject to a series of sequential barriers that need to be overcome for future development. Failure to pass through these ‘barriers’ is likely to lead to extinction. A series of barriers, or filters, would be expected to decrease the number of potential civilisations present in the universe. Could it be that these filters have removed all advanced life forms except, one, that is us? Perhaps our civilisation hasn’t reached the critical event yet and the potential for extinction is still to come. Hanson proposes nine possibilities that must be fulfilled for intelligent life to evolve and advance to the ultimate attainment of interstellar travel:

The right star system

Formation of RNA and DNA molecules

Evolution of simple single cells (prokaryotes)

Evolution of complex single cells (eukaryotes)

Evolution of sexual reproduction

Complex, multi-cellular organisms

Tool using intelligent organisms

The technological stage that exists now

Colonisation of the galaxy/universe

This list should not be considered exhaustive and there may be other important and salient factors influencing the developmental process. The big question: has our civilisation passed the block or is the catastrophe still to come? Hanson thinks that the filter lies ahead. Thus, in his opinion, there is a barrier, in the future, that will, or may, prevent further progress. Several candidates are waiting to extinguish our existence: mayhap an asteroid will strike and wipe out all civilisation; there is the possibility that a supervolcano will erupt spreading ash, doom, and destruction upon our upturned and soot begrimed faces. These possibilities are considered rare contenders for our demise. There are more likely candidates: nuclear armageddon. A war between the super-powers could result in nuclear escalation ending in the total annihilation of civilisation; there is a possibility that Earth's resources will become exhausted. This may not necessarily lead to the total destruction of humanity, but it might push us back to a pre-technological status. A status from which it may prove difficult for us to return to our current technological advancement; there is a real possibility of a viral pandemic. Consider the humble flu virus. In 1918 a particularly virulent strain of influenza afflicted half of the human population resulting in a hundred million deaths. Given the rapid mutation rate of viruses, a future pandemic is a virtual certainty. However, it is difficult to gauge the impact this will have on our civilisation; there is a particularly chilling option. Our ability to create machines with artificial intelligence has become a reality and we continue to make vast strides in the arena of artificial intelligence. Perhaps, soon, we will develop machines that will think and act independently of their masters; machines endowed with a self-learning intellect immeasurably superior to our own. If we are unable to control our Frankenstein monster then we may find that the human race is deemed an impediment to our former robotic slaves. What happens when the human race finds itself redundant? These are just a few possible 'filter' scenarios. I'm sure my readers could think of others- let me know in the comments.     

Let us strive for optimism and imagine the following: by some means, somehow, we gather enough wisdom and knowledge to break through the remaining barrier. What awaits humanity on the other side? Assuming that technology continues to increase at the current rate we may expect to see colonisation, in the relatively near future, of our solar system beginning with the moon, and then perhaps, Mars. Obviously, the greatest barrier to interstellar travel is the vast distances entailed. Even travel to the nearest star, travelling at the speed of light, would take over four years. It is worth noting that we are denied the possibility of reaching light speed and even significant sub-light speeds by the fundamental laws of physics and ultimate universal reality. Some physicists believe that we can overcome this limitation by developing the warp drive. In this way, we could travel almost instantaneously between vast cosmic distances. However, warping spacetime comes with a hefty price. Indeed, the energy requirements are truly staggering and are unlikely to be attained by current technology. Therefore, it will be necessary to develop a system with manageable and feasible energy requirements. If mastered, the warp drive would allow for the rapid colonisation of other star systems. 

Hanson is a pessimist (ever met an optimistic economist?) and considers that the forthcoming 'Great Filter' represents a fundamental challenge for our species. If he is right this could explain why we see no evidence for other advanced civilisations, because there are none and we are all alone in a cold, uncaring universe. Could it be that we are special, very special (the snowflakes were right all along), and in the next million years or so we will become the masters of the galaxy?  What will we do if we encounter an emerging civilisation technologically less advanced than our own? Will we nurture that civilisation and provide succour? Or will we crush it underfoot and discard its broken remnants amongst the stars? Personally, I would like to see them burn. But, I would say that, wouldn't I?

There goes the alien neighbourhood

      

The Cultural Influence of Greece Upon Rome

Happy New Year and belated Yuletide greetings to all my readers. May this year provide great bounty and may your esteemed countenances be showered with honeyed sweetmeats and stuff.

Now moving on to the topic in hand.

By the beginning of the third century BC, the western Mediterranean was dominated by the city-states of Carthage in north Africa and Syracuse in Sicily. Alexander, The Great (356-323 BC), had concentrated his forces and conquests toward the east, however, once his eastern conquests had been completed it is likely that his war machine would have turned west to tackle Greece's oldest enemy, the Carthaginians. But it was not to be as Alexander died at 33 and left his vast, but fragile empire, to be divided between his quarrelsome generals.

At the time of Alexander’s conquest, Rome was still expanding and consolidating power in the Italian peninsula. By 290 BC Rome was in control of the majority of Italy after the ultimate defeat of an old intractable enemy, the Samnites. The next step for the Romans in their pursuit of Italian domination was to move against the Greek dominion of southern Italy.

The Greeks had carved out a presence in southern Italy in the eighth and seventh centuries  BC. The first city to come under the Roman heel was Neapolis in 327 BC. Others followed during the Samnite and Pyrrhic wars. The Greek city of Tarentum was the last to fall on the mainland in 272 BC and the Greek city of Syracuse, Sicily, was absorbed during the Second Punic war (212 BC). Further contact between the Greek and Roman world would continue as Roman power expanded during the Punic wars and it was inevitable that Rome would come into conflict with Macedonian power. By 148 BC, Macedonian power in Asia and Europe had been broken and only the Macedonian Egyptian monarchy remained unsullied; leastways by Roman power.

After this brief introduction, I would like to consider the cultural interactions between Rome and Greece during this historical period. Firstly, let me deal with the impact of Roman culture on the Greeks: I think it can be said, with confidence, that the cultural impact of Rome upon Greece was virtually nil. The Greeks were notably and rightly proud of their contribution to the arts and philosophy and were loath to assimilate, with minor exceptions, cultural influences from other nations. Haughty Greeks were of the opinion that non-Greek peoples were barbaric and inferior. However, when the Greeks came into contact with the Romans, although they considered them inferior in terms of culture and civilisation, they nevertheless recognised and respected, albeit grudgingly, Roman military might and their inherent political stability; political stability was never a quality that could ever be ascribed to Greeks, then and now.  

The effect of Greek culture on the Romans: When the Romans came into contact with the Greeks it became obviously manifest to them that they were vastly inferior to the Greeks in artistic and intellectual endeavour. Roman culture seemed tawdry in comparison and Greek culture captured/captivated the imagination of the Roman elite, especially the young. Cultivated Romans strained to learn Greek and ape Greek mannerisms and culture. The relationship was essentially parasitic as Rome never developed a new art form or an original philosophic system.  However, the promulgation of Greek ideas and culture did not sit well with conservative and traditionalist Romans. Traditionalist Romans considered the Greeks as effete, decadent and prone to homosexuality; by this time in history, the Greeks were guilty on all accounts. Cato the elder (234-149 BC) was a good representative of the conservative backlash after the second Punic war. He hankered for a return to simple Roman virtues. Of course, simple virtues whatever they represent, are for folk who cannot see and most folk are blind. Although Cato could lead a simple life of dignitas and virtue, few had the iron will to follow him into his unbending and austere landscape and regimen. Cato represented 'old Rome', an ideal that existed prior to the Punic wars. Then, the Romans had been a simple bucolic folk endowed with all the qualities of farmers: austere, brutal, hardworking and stupid. 

The first contact with the Roman war machine came as a shock for the Greeks who perceived the Romans as wantonly brutal. After a few battles, the Greeks maintained a healthy respect for Roman might and the fear of atrocity was ever-present. 

In the end, the stability of 'Pax Romana', over several centuries enabled Greek culture to endure and spread. This was particularly so in the eastern part of the empire centred on the city of  Constantinople. There developed a divergence within the empire. Greek became the language of the eastern empire and Latin was reserved for legal documentation and letters to the emperor, while the western part of the empire, spoke Latin. The barbarian incursions of the fifth century AD destroyed the last of what was Roman civilisation in the West. However, the eastern part of the empire, although beset with numerous enemies, managed to endure for a further thousand years. During the 'Dark Ages,' Greek culture and learning were lost to the West. Rude Germanic barbarians cared little for sophistry and the dialectic. In this case, the sword turned out to be mightier than the pen. In the seventh century AD, the conquering Arabs acquired Roman lands in the east and quickly became acquainted with Greek culture and civilisation. They were suitably impressed and they began to translate and issue commentary on Greek texts thus, what had been lost to the West became preserved. Contact with the Muslims in Spain resulted in learned men of the West becoming reacquainted with Greek ideas, knowledge, and philosophy. This acted as a spur and impetus to Western learning in the eleventh century leading to the rise of Scholastic philosophy. In addition, wise men of the West came to know Arabic numerals, algebra, and alchemy. They quickly realised the importance of the Arabic counting system and its superiority over Roman numerals.  The scene had been set for the European renaissance, the rise of Western science and European world dominance. But that, of course, is another story.  

Cato in repose

     

Arian Controversy Part I

Nicaea: Not my type of party

If you are an orthodox Christian you must believe that God exists as a Trinity: three gods manifest as  one entity. All equally powerful, omniscient and omnipotent. This makes no sense, but this does not matter because it is a mystery not made apparent to our mortal minds. This is the view of the Catholic church and has been since the fourth century. It would be interesting to poll a random collection of Christians, both Catholic, and Protestant, to see if they could articulate their conception of the relationship between Jesus and God. It is my humble contention that we would be exposed to a diverse set of views, not all of them Trinitarian in any strict doctrinal sense; least ways as construed by the early church fathers. And in a way, this would reflect the notions concerning God and Jesus as held by early Christians of the first, second, third and even subsequent centuries.

As the Christian faith developed across the Roman world in the third and fourth centuries the church leaders became very concerned to adopt and enforce a dogma concerning the nature of God and Jesus, come, God, come man. The synoptic gospels (Mark, Mathew, and Luke) were of the mind that Jesus was begotten of God and a mortal woman. The role of Joseph in the whole affair is a thwart one over which much ink (and just a tincture of blood)  has been spilled over the intervening two millennia. Mayhap cuckold is too harsh a word? Thus, the concept of the Trinity did not exist in the minds of the first  biblical authors. The Trinity begins to raise its three divine heads in the writings of John penned at least seventy years after the crucifixion. The fourth gospeller seems to have been a philosophically savvy Greek-speaking Jew of the diaspora. As an aside, it is unlikely that his name was ‘John’. The gospel was written anonymously and we have no idea who authored this rather fascinating and often theologically bewildering tome. His gospel was an early attempt at interposing/imposing Greek philosophical ideology onto Jewish Christianity. Educated Greek Christians were not overly impressed with Jewish theology which they considered primitive and penned by barbarians. They felt a need to 'smarten up' the intellectual content and inculcate Greek superior philosophical learning. Hence John's gospel is completely alien in temper, timbre, and tone to the preceding gospels. The synoptic gospels are very Jewish in expression and outlook while John's gospel has been thoroughly leavened in concept and content by Greek philosophical and intellectual concepts. A very interesting document indeed, but spurious when considering the original message of Jesus and, in the aftermath, the stark message of Christianity.

The ‘Trinity concept’ was but one of a series of competing ideologies fulminating during the early centuries of Christianity. This inconsistency was recognised as a problem by the early church fathers and they felt a need to formulate an official Christian creed. A creed to be kept and followed by all  Christian clerics and laity. In 325 AD the Roman Emperor, Constantine, presided at a meeting in Nicaea attended by 300 bishops, mostly from the eastern Roman provinces. The meeting was called ostensibly to tackle the serious ideological and theological challenge of Arianism to the conventional teachings of the Catholic church. Constantine was not particularly motivated by religious zeal but was more concerned with theological and hence political unity and he genuinely favoured a compromise solution between the Catholics and Arians. Alas, a mutually satisfactory solution, through concession, was not to be forthcoming due to the intransigence of the adherents of the two opposing doctrines. The theological debate of the time was highly intense and acrimonious.

The Arian teachings were promulgated by Arius (who else), a presbyter from Alexandria. Arius (c AD 256-336) disputed the fundamental divinity of Christ. Thus, Jesus, unlike God, was not omnitemporal, or had always existed, but was born in time and as a son to a father was separate and subordinate to God. This was in contrast to Catholic doctrine, which stated that God existed as three entities, but is one being, having a single divine nature. The divine entities of the Trinity are equal in having all the omni attributes and importantly, they have always existed. That is the Trinity concept in a nutshell- makes a lot of sense, dun it?

At the council, the argument between the two doctrinal camps was fierce with Athanasius of Alexandria leading the Catholic camp. In the end, and after much maneuvering and underhand tactics, Athanasius' viewpoint won out and Arius and his small band of followers were exiled by Constantine. This was not the end of the story and Arianism would soon see a surge in its fortunes although Catholicism and its Trinitarian teachings would triumph in the end. But I will leave the story here for now and pick up the second installment in this thrilling saga at a future date........

As a digression:  With the advent of increasing secular power in the 4th century AD, the Catholic authorities began to use Roman power to impose dogma on wayward clerics. And those of a recalcitrant bent were branded heretics. Initially, exile and loss of property were deemed sufficient punishment for not towing the company line. Later, of course, when the Church's power and self-confidence had risen to increasingly dizzy heights, unrepentant dissenters were sent forth, from this world to the next to be judged by the ultimate arbiter, God. 

Arius: Seems a bag of laffs

Torremolinos in the Dark Ages

Hurry up and invent sunscreen and DDT

Tis time for the annual war band excursion to Torremolinos in Iberia. Oh me and the lads do look forward to our two weeks away. We take a leisurely longboat, stopping off at a quaint little village on the west coast of France. There is a little patisserie which serves the most delicate and melts in the mouth pastries. The filo is divine and to die for. Which is just as well considering the exchange rate between the Tipton groat and the frank- I blame the Saracens and Blackamoors myself, and their ongoing strife contributing to worldwide instability in the international monetary markets. Not all bad news, because who wants to pay 40 francs for 12 sweatmeats? Being disinclined to pay we usually kill the owner and burn down the premises. Now you might think this represents the policy of folly considering we return to the same place every year. But you would be wrong. It seems that when one proprietor ascends/descends to Valhalla, another takes his place. Thus is the nature of commerce in the Dark Ages.

From there we cruise along the French and Iberian coasts, pass through the pillars of Herakles, before eventually alighting on the golden, flagon bestrewn beaches, of Torremolinos. After such an arduous/audacious journey, and after beaching the boat, we usually hit the local taverna: 'Mr Patel's Authentic West Saxon and East Jute, Pub'. Here we feast mightily on fish 'n' chips and quaff deeply on Tipton, best mead. Honestly, it's as if we haven't left home, except for the sun (and the flies). When folk, back home, ask me what it's like, I say it's hot, bloody hot.

Back to the taverna.......Usually, the place is filled with doe-eyed, lithe (wait to they get older), raven-haired wenches. For 20 groats they will gyrate on your lap and inflame your senses and manhood. The inevitable, merciful relief, will cost a further 20 groats or a brace of rabbits.

Next day, at noon, we plunge in the turquoise, turd bedecked, seas. In truth, the locals are well-advised to dig midden pits rather than squat and squeeze upon the headland overlooking our beach. Then we lie on the scorching sands to top up our vitamin D levels and to transform our livid forms into vivid purple. Some of the lads catch crabs, but nothing that can't be cured with DDT and paraffin. Then time for more Tipton mead. And so the cycle goes on, until on the final day we burn and pillage the environs. Lastly, we erect a pyre on the sands and immolate a snake-hipped bartender to Woden and Loki to appease the gods and ensure a fair wind for the passage home.

Next year, I think we might go to Margate. Torremolinos is attracting too many uncouth Jutes. Not only do they hog the sunbeds, but they have the annoying habit of talking loudly in restaurants. And they have the cheek to call us barbarians! No wonder we are driven to express ourselves by burning, pillaging and indiscriminating smiting.         

Slash and Burn

Before the devastation

The previous owner of our property planted 138 eucalyptus trees spanning two sides of the boundary. The species is not a New Zealand native but hails from across the ditch in Australia. The original idea was that the trees would provide a renewable firewood resource. The only heat available for the single-story home is a wood burner fire and the idea was for the trees to be periodically sacrificed and laid out to dry for a couple of years before being consumed by the fire god, Moloch. It seemed like a good plan especially as the trees are full of resin thus making excellent firewood. The problem, however, is that Australian eucalyptus grows insanely fast and our trees have taken on epic proportions and continue to grow at three metres a year. As the tree is relatively shallow rooting it is prone to toppling in high winds. It has been a particularly prescient decision as New Zealand has just been hit by a series of storms. Possibly due to our inland position, our part of heaven has been spared the worst of the weather. And so I engaged a local arborist to chop down about 90 trees along one of our boundaries. As you can imagine the ‘west’ field has been transformed into a mired mess with foliage, branches and felled trees scattered akimbo. Also, the heavy machinery has churned up most of the pasture but, given time, and nature’s tender caress, the field will rise once more, thrusting forth green shoots anew. However, the boundary will need to be reconstructed and I’ll be looking to plant a number of native trees and large shrubs where the eucalyptus once thrived and was succoured by nature’s benign, Sylvian stewardship (stop being a ponce, Flaxen).     

It will take a while, perhaps the whole of summer and much of the autumn to process the timber and to burn the mountainous mound of foliage. I’m looking forward to the burning part of the proceedings. As my regulars are aware, I’m very fond of burning stuff. Flames are cathartic and cleansing and I intend to dance around the conflagration tastefully attired in a wolf skin. No doubt the whole ceremony will be accompanied by a liberal libation of honey mead: should give the neighbours something to talk about.

I’ll need some assistance and my son has promised to help, especially with the heavy lifting. The plan is to use a chainsaw to cut the timber into pieces amenable to further processing with a splitting axe. Hopefully, the field will eventually, after much diligent labour, be bestrewn with multiple ‘pyramids’ of wood adrying. I suspect it will take about two years before we can use the wood in the burner. Of course, there’s way too much wood for us and I’m hoping to sell most of the wood to the locals. This will provide a great revenue stream and I’m sure it will more than pay for the arborist's fee and the expense of buying a grunty chainsaw. Certainly, eucalyptus is a much sort after timber for home heating. As a premium wood, it commands a higher price than ubiquitous pine.

Sometime in the future, I will have to tackle the 40 or so trees on the adjacent boundary. This task will be a little troublesome due to the presence of my large shed. The boundary fence will have to be dismantled and the trees will have to be felled so that they fall in my neighbour’s field- perhaps next year. Also, it means I will have to consult, nay liaise, with another human being. One of the reasons I moved to a large plot in the country was to escape from any idle chatter/prattle with the great unwashed. The other advantage: previously when shooting my longbow on public land, the proles had the annoying and disconcerting habit of wandering in front of the action. The irony, of course, is that now, although I have plenty of land to hide the bodies, there is no one to ‘accidently’ feather with a yard shaft. Such is the ultimate tragedy of rural life.                     

There goes the neighbourhood

Old Age and Sperm

Three tails better than one?

Unlike women, men continue to produce reproductive germ cells unto death. While the available eggs peter out some time in a women’s late 30s or even 40s, a man can still, if he has the stamina, sire a child when he is in his 90s: the pervert, Charlie Chaplin fathered a child when he was 75. This is not to say that the sperm of a 60-year-old man is of equal quality to a 16-year-old boy. Although it is said that wisdom comes with age- although to be honest, this attestation is open to doubt: there is nothing so sad as an old fool. Wisdom is perhaps the only human quality that is correlated with a hoary old chin. Sadly, our physical and mental attributes steadily decline as we age and sperm is no exception. I was made painfully aware of this problem several years ago when I had to ‘produce issue’ during the development of a genetic test for sperm. I was the only male in the department able to perform this duty as all other males in the lab had teetered toward vas deferens ablation: mayhap the teetering was post-op?  

Under the microscope, my sperm appeared ‘morphologically diverse’. Most appeared normal, but there was a significant minority exhibiting physical aberrations. Some appeared to have two tails; others were endowed with two heads. Others were devoid of content. A whole menagerie of freaks residing in plain sight. Needless to say, these aberrant sperm would be useless as vehicles for the transport of genetic material unto the next generation..

This is but the tip of the iceberg. A man’s sperm, especially after 35, declines in many other respects. Thus, not only is there a decrease in overall fertility but there is also an increased chance of miscarriage, stillbirths and birth defects: assuming of course that the sperm can summon enough strength to power through the birth canal. Continued exposure to damaging environmental factors and the failure of an ageing immune system to detect and remove defective sperm are responsible for the corresponding increase in defects with age. In addition, aged sperm accumulate deleterious gene mutations resulting in an increase in the incidence of dominant genetic conditions.

As I’ve discussed previously (see here) the sum of our genetics is more than our genes. Epigenetic factors also have a role in controlling gene expression. In addition to changes in DNA base sequences, structural changes affecting methylation and histone configuration can have dramatic and heritable consequences, often affecting multiple generations. Epigenetic changes within the germ cells of both sexes can be influenced by a myriad of environmental effectors. And it is therefore of no surprise, certainly not to a geneticist, that the depredations of time, mediated through epigenetics, can have a real and negative influence on genetic expression. Recent research indicates that changes in methylation patterns in aged sperm are particularly important in the development of neuropsychiatric disorders in subsequent offspring. This is a particular problem in the developed West where career-minded couples are delaying parenthood. A UK survey between 1993 to 2003 divined that the percentage of 35-54-year-old fathers had increased from 25% to 40% resulting in a corresponding increase in neurodevelopmental problems in their children. There appeared a strong correlation between epigenetic change and the development of autism and schizophrenia. Interestingly, this observation may be compounded over multiple generations giving rise to a synergistic mechanistic effect: aged father to aged father to aged father....... That said, the causal mechanisms with regard to epigenetic change and neuropathology are, as yet, poorly understood.     

No surprises for those who can see, especially those with access to a high powered light microscope. Making genetically healthy and robust children is definitely for the young and preferably the ‘genetically advantaged’ - read into this what you will. Ageing is relentless and unforgiving. It creases the brow and bends the back. Spun silver flecks once lush and vibrant locks. Rheumy eyes beseech an incomprehensible world. The prostate waxes great and protrudes thus facilitating a back and forth rocking motion. Our unique genetic code, manifest within sperm, bears the sticky and indelible mark of our increasing decrepitude. A decrepitude destined to bestride the generations and haunt our children and our children’s children unto the fourth or fifth generation.