What do you think?
Rate this book


368 pages, Hardcover
First published March 3, 2014
There is, and always has been, something rootless and irresponsible about our attitude to the land. We treat it, we go at things ‘as it there were no tomorrow’, using, wasting, making the most of everything while it lasts, stripping assets, taking the short view; as if we had no responsibility to those who might come after because we have no sense of what lies behind. We took the land, grabbed it by main force, so we miss the sense of its being a gift – something to be held in trust and passed on. Perhaps a deep awareness of history has less to do with the past than with a capacity to hold on hard to the future.
There is just a flicker of pain in the blue-blue-eyes at this suggestion from an East Coaster that he might have washed up in some corner of Hicksville.
‘Ristretto, sir?’ he asks with a slight curl of the lip.
‘That'd be great,’ I say.
‘Coretto?’
Put thoroughly in my place, I tell him meekly, ‘I don't think we need to go that far.’
There is that ‘habit of mind’ we think of as being essentially and uniquely Anglo-Saxon: one that prefers to argue from example and practice rather than principle; that is happy, in a pragmatic way, to be in doubt as to why something works so long as it does work; is flexible, experimental, adaptive, and scornful of all those traps it sees in theory and principles. […] The language itself was to be disarmed. Irony would replace invective; good-humour, a middle tone, balance of syntactical structure, would ensure the proper weighing of pros and cons that would make extremist views so crass and undisciplined, so ungentlemanly, as to have no place in polite society. Moderate language would produce moderation.