Patrick Moore

Surely not!

While everyone is entitled to their political opinion, we're entitled to judge people for their opinions. He is a good broadcaster but the fact that he holds the views he does colours how I think of him.

That said, unless Graham has some evidence for his comments, he probably ought to leave well alone.


regards,

Tam

He certainly turned me onto astronomy (or rather one of his books did, when I as seven). I met him when I was about 13, when he came to our school - he was a fantastic speaker, one of those people with the ift to make complex science not only comprehensible to the layman, but also to make it thrilling.

A national treasure (if bit weird politically).

K

When I saw this turn a bit ugly, I was saddened. Now I just wonder if the character assasination has any validity. Firstly the idea that he is some sort of pervert is indeed something (more than his political views, I must say) that would be rather unpleasnat if it were true. I am inclined not to beleive it, being a kindly sort of person who always looks for the best in people, and so I think it might be good to put up or shut up on that one, whoever started it.

As for Moore allgedly having some political views that might be widely disagreed with here, again, I have to say I have never heard of them. They may exist, but surely are of almost no significance. Many elderly people hold (and express) views most shocking to younger generations. It does not mean they intend to act on them or are a threat to anyone, so what does it matter, even if the alleged views really ARE held by the man. If he was in politics, or expressed these views within the context of his TV programme, then it might well be more important.

Where were these views published? I read an interview with Moore in the Telegraph just over a year ago, and politics never was once raised. So if he privately holds some views, generally disagreed with, well, I bet we all have some odd views we don't go public with, and so it hardly matters, IMO. I could get shot down tomorrow for one or two of mine, though I have no moral problem holding them and they are well known to people who know me well. It is part of the bigger picture...

Please leave the poor old man alone to carry on being an inspiration in his field...

Fredrik

Well said Frederik. What started as a vaguely Malt fuelled late night dedication to a fine old British institution has sadly taken a direction I didn't want it to.
Let's get back to the original sentiment.

Now who likes Wagner?

Fredrik

This was my fault so perhaps I should defend myself. Moore was interviewed in The Independent about his life, unfortunately the full article requires subscription to access it or I would post the link. His views on race and imigration are not alleged, they were (as I recall) unprompted by the interviewer and he shared them freely, I am sure in the full knowledge they would be published. He was clearly not trying to hide his opinions in the interview.

As I said in my original post I admire his longevity, enthusiasm and passion for his subject, he was part of the reason for a love of space and science when I was younger.

The point I raised is that the interview means I just cannot quite look at him the same now, as the benign eccentric, or the 'fantastic character' of the opening post. I know his views are not illegal (and I have never suggested he has questionable sexual predilictions) but I personally find his broadcasting persona is now tainted. This may say more about my moral squeamishness than it does about PM but there you go.

I'm sorry I read the interview initially, and I'm sorry I posted the kick start to the thread going sour.

Bruce

I too read an article in the Independent where Moore described Enoch Powell as "the most dangerous left-winger this country has ever had" It's fairly obvious, to me at least, that anyone with political opinions to the right of Enoch Powell is likely to be a fairly odious person. In this context, I am not really concerned how good an astronomer he is. If his political views spoil an image of him as an eccentric old buffoon then so be it.

Pervert or no pervert, I do know he's seen Uranus!!

Boom Boom.

Not only are none of you allowed to listen to Wagner but you must not read any T S Eliot either.

Bob

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bob mccluckie:
Not only are none of you allowed to listen to Wagner but you must not read any T S Eliot either.
___________________________________________________

Fine by me, I'll stick to Beethoven and Shelley.

quote:

Originally posted by bob mccluckie:
Not only are none of you allowed to listen to Wagner but you must not read any T S Eliot either.

Bob

Now hang on a minute... There's nothing wrong, or even hypocritical, with disliking someone for their political views yet being able to appreciate their art. I think wagner was a pretty awful person (for his anti-semitic views), but I also think he wrote wonderful music. If one disregarded the literature or music of anyone who else such views (albeit to lesser extents) life would be dull: Trollope and Dickins are probably out too. To say nothing of the fact that if you don't play Wagner because of his views, he's won: he was wrong, and we'll think about that while we enjoy his music. I was at a moving concert recently given by Barenboim's West-Eastern orchestra (or arab and Israeli kids) at the Edinburgh festival, before his wagner encore, he explained the choice was motivated by the fact that a number of the Israeli musicians had asked him why they weren't playing any.

To return to the subject at hand, Patrick Moore is a great broadcaster (and a great public speaker) on science and astronomy. I admire him very much for all that. However, I would admire him more if he didn't have such unpalatable views.

There's a tone with a great many posts on this thread which suggests that, with regard to Moore there are just two views: one, he's a great broadcaster, a national treasure, how dare anyone denigrate his name; and two, he's a horrible, horrible man and shouldn't be on tv. As normal, the truth is a little more nuanced than all this and lies somewhere between, as, indeed, it does with Wagner or Trollope.


regards,

Tam

Dear Friends,

This is not so very funny anymore. I was never a watcher of the Sky At Night as it is too late for me, and now I don't even have a TV, so I'll never see it again...

But as I wrote above, which one of us can really say that we don't hold views that would put us (at least some time in the future if not actually now) beyond the modern liberal pale.

I am not going to defend it here, but consider Oscar Wilde's quotation on the subject of the persuit of the inedible by the unspeakable. I am quite happy enough to be considered, in the terms of his quote, unspeakable, but I don't consider that I am actually unspeakable...

Each to their own I guess, but even if one does not like another's opinion, in a free society we should all fight for the freedom to hold an opinion however much it diverges from our own. Drive these opinions into an underground ghetto and the results could be far worse in my view, given time.

Fair enough to moderate your views of someone you don't know personally because of some realtive hard to come by reportage of their expressed views, but for heaven's sake be thankful that any of us are still free to express our opinions openly without the thought police quietly taking us away...

Please leave the old man alone for what was undoubtedly a grave error of judgement on his part, and get over it quietly.

Sincerely, Fredrik

My sources?

Pee More lives in Selsey, by Chichester on the South Coast, and has lived there for years. I have a great friend who lives there and visit the area often. All the locals will tell you that he does not enjoy the company of women and is as queer as a coot.

Nothing wrong with that, of couse, but maybe not a home in which young boys should flourish.

In the good old days, Obituaries in The Times used to conclude "X never married"!

Graham

quote:

Originally posted by graham55:
All the locals will tell you that he does not enjoy the company of women and is as queer as a coot.

[...]

In the good old days, Obituaries in The Times used to conclude "X never married"!

Perhaps therein lies the secret to his longevity....???

Jon

You may be right!

G

What if "all the locals" are wrong? Does that leave the rumour mongers pedalling a lie?

At the least this is mere tittle-tattle and at worst, a very unpleasant bit of speculation indeed, and it possibly says more about the purveyors of it than the victim, I think.

Passing it on without the certainty it is true is just as bad, I am sure. Fancy if you were on the other end of the stick, especially if it really were untrue! Has that ever happened to you? There is nothing that can be done quickly to put it right, once the damage is done.

Fredrik

Well, the stories back to boys' cricket teams (which is when my friend became aware of the stories over 20 years ago).

And, in view of Moore's political thoughts, it's hard to see how he could ever be anyone's favourite uncle.

Not a nice man, in my opinion.

Graham

Still sounds like tittle-tattle of the most odious sort to me. As I said earlier this kind of thing really does reflect on the messenger as much as the person described in the message. At this point I am going to give up with this. I don't know Moore, and it really matters little what I think, as clearly spreading second hand nonesense seems to please some rather more than it pleases me to read it.

Good night, and I hope no one ever tries the trick on you Dear Graham!

Fredrik

quote:

Originally posted by graham55:
My sources?

Pee More lives in Selsey, by Chichester on the South Coast, and has lived there for years. I have a great friend who lives there and visit the area often. All the locals will tell you that he does not enjoy the company of women and is as queer as a coot.

Nothing wrong with that, of couse, but maybe not a home in which young boys should flourish.

In the good old days, Obituaries in The Times used to conclude "X never married"!

Graham

Sorry Graham but this is just making things worse and perhaps shows a side of you that's no more savoury than Mr Moore's alleged private preferences. So what if he is a raving old queer? Why should that justify labelling him as a child molester? I'm a randy 51 year old and I'd be mortally offended if somebody suggested that made my home a place where "young girls wouldn't flourish".

Maybe time to call it a day on a perfectly innocent post I made when I was half cut in a good mood.

Tom

You're absolutely right. I was probably three-quarters cut when I made my original posting, so have absolutely no idea whether young boys would be secure with P Moore.

Apologies!

Graham

Is being drunk a defense against defamation of character?

Let's see now:

A cricketer.
Zylophone player.
Single.
Broadcaster and author.
Arguably the wealthiest man in the village.

Sounds guilty to me.

Perhaps you should step away from the keyboard before somebody else gets hurt graham?

I suppose this is the difference in celebrity status between the UK and the USA.

Here we do our best to destroy the wealthy and famous. They probably deserve it based on historical precedent? Mill owners, the landed gentry etc. The class struggle. Burn the machines! Nobody deserves to be that rich. Nobody deserves to succeed. Old money. New money. The money is always in the wrong hands and getting investment for good ideas is impossible. Risk taking is a dirty word. (or even two words) Getting above your station in life. Glass ceilings.

In the USA the wealthy are admired and can (allegedly) do no wrong. The US has a dynamic wealth-producing economic system and has more millionaires per square mile etc. Money flows towards good ideas. Risk is the name of the game with high rewards.

Too simplistic?

Nime

I was pissed, but I'm not saying that I was wrong, nor that I defamed him.

The man's a dreadful old coot. (In my opinion, of course.)

That's got fig all to do with money and wealth, or money flowing to good ideas.

G

Well thank god for that. I was beginning to think you were biased.

Should one completely dismiss an artist because of their political views? of course not, but, as has already been said, it will inevitably affect one's enjoyment of their work. In purely aesthetic terms, I can admire the work of T.S. Elliot and regard him as a 'high-priest' of Modernism. However, to me, the impact of Picasso's 'Guernica' is immeasurably more powerful due, in part, to the motivation of the artist to create a work which sought to portray the barbarity of Fascism and war.

As to whether we all hold views which stray 'beyond the modern Liberal pale', in any plural society there exists divergent views and this is generally regarded as desirable. However, as I mentioned in my previous post, Patrick Moore holds the view that Enoch Powell was, in his opinion, nowhere near right-wing enough. To anyone unfamiliar with Powell's infamous 'Rivers of Blood' rant, suffice to say that it was the most disgusting racist bile. It is not a matter of allowing some harmless old buffoon to express racist views and resigning ourselves to the fact that his politics may differ from our own. It is a rightful condemnation of racist views and an affirmation that the expression of such views must always be regarded as unacceptable.

quote:

Originally posted by graham55:
Nime

I was pissed, but I'm not saying that I was wrong, nor that I defamed him.


G

You think allegations of paedophilia re not defamatatory? What planet are you on.

From your comments about Patrick Moore, and others if memory serves, you have a thing about paedophilia. Would people think twice about entrusting you with minors, I wonder.

That and your obvious homophobia.