Spectator: inspired by Joanna Lumley

Spectator: inspired by Joanna Lumley

Joanna Lumley's take on life (unflattering photograph? Tear it up) proves inspiring but editing life so that it feels better doesn't always work

Thursday, 24 May 2007

Carla Carlisle


In the olden days, when I was young and Fortnum & Mason's had that soda fountain on the ground floor, I once sat next to a man who told me he'd been married to Joanna Lumley. I don't think it was a pick-up line (for the record: talking about beautiful, brainy ex-wives is not seductive); he was simply recalling better days.

Over the years, I've missed that soda fountain and come to adore Joanna Lumley. Listening to her last week on Desert Island Discs was sheer heaven: the gorgeous voice, the perfect choice of music—Beethoven and Elvis—and her brilliant common sense. She endeared herself to me even more by her attitude towards life's little negatives. An unflattering photograph? Tear it up. A critical review? Throw it away. Don't let it bring you down.

My policy entirely (the photograph at the top of the page is beyond my reach), and I've gone through life editing out the bad marks, the sharp rebuke, the gloomy appraisal. When I received a report card, age seven, stating 'Carla accepts criticism well', I quit school. I was required by law to return, but my heart was no longer in it.

Editing life so that it feels better doesn't always work. Putting on make-up in front of a mirror lit with 40-watt bulbs, then seeing yourself in the Peter Jones dressing room can deprive you of your will to live. On a pastoral note: when the countryside had patches of vibrant yellow, you could pretend that it was mustard and romantic and French. Now that it is a violent yellow sea, all pretence is over.

But there is a difference between tossing out the picture that shows the subcutaneous fat under your chin and telling yourself you have the jaw line of Audrey Hepburn. It is called deceit. On an agricultural note: that is exactly what we are doing. We're telling ourselves that biofuels are good, that they are sweet to the planet and liberate us from the yoke of Middle Eastern oil. The truth is: biofuels may be the nail in the planet's coffin.

I don't like saying it. I'm a farmer and wheat has just reached a 10-year high. Optimism doesn't grow naturally on the Suffolk prairies, but it is seeding down as grain prices rise, and global stockpiles hit a 25-year low. Why? Because of demand for ethanol, the alcohol made from maize and wheat that can fill up our petrol tank (ok, and the farm bank account).

So that we can feel virtuous as we drive through the yellow countryside, virgin habitat is being ploughed up all over the globe. The UN predicts that the natural rain forest of Indonesia will have disappeared in 15 years, because of the planting of palm oil to turn into biodiesel for the European market—palm-oil biodiesel that causes 10 times as much climate change as ordinary diesel. It's about more than orangutans. The fuel planters are bulldozing South America, Asia and Africa, literally ploughing up the planet.

My husband used to search my family tree: 'Your folks have been in America for 300 years and they don't even have a chain of gas stations?' I saw biofuels as the chance to compensate for my ancestral lack of verve. Now I suspect that filling up Volvos with biofuel will do more harm than good and I wonder how we can press the 'pause' button while we rethink this.

On my personal Desert Island list was always the Supremes singing Stop! In the Name of Love, apt now because we desperately need a freeze on biofuels. But the song I can't get out of my head is Neil Young—'Don't let it bring you down, it's only castles burning.'

Comments


September 16 13:24

Joanne Lumley's in the news today!

Her intelligent words about Elvis Presley on Desert Island Discs, were heartwarming!


May 30 12:10

Carla is right to be concerned about biofuels produced through palm oil. However, cottonseed biofuel does not have such problems. Cuba is geared up to make a huge impact in this area - but will America let them?


May 25 22:33

Do your research before hand please!

biofuels are not causing the deforestation you speak of: the vast majority of palm oil-related deforestation is due to that oil's use in cosmetics and food products, NOT biofuels.

The proportion of palm oil going to biofuel use is extremely small, and furthermore, many legislation efforts around renewable fuels are specifically designed to cull out biofuels from non sustainable sources such as what you speak of.

The result: biofuel producers are investing in sustainable feedstocks. Meaning, the right course is being followed.

Your rather uninformed ranting against biofuel completely misses what is really driving palm oil related deforestation: developing countries' increased appetite for cosmetics and their developed world foods like beef and oils for fast food frying.

Get your facts correct please, you are way, way off the mark here. Or perhaps you intend to help the petroleum industry continue its exclusive control over our transport energy needs?


Post your comment:




IPC Media Limited, owner of countrylife.co.uk, will collect your personal information solely to process your request.

Property search

Most Popular Articles

Tottering-by-Gently by Annie Tempest

  • Tottering-by-Gently by Annie Tempest

Editor’s Choice The pick of the crop

The Magazine

Country Life is the essential weekly read for those who are passionate about the British countryside, fine art, gardening and property.
 

Classifieds