A wet Oxford afternoon

It rained all day. Three hours up to Oxford, three hours back in the dark. At the interment last November of Malcolm Oxley’s ashes in the Quad, I shared an umbrella with George Fenton. Except at school he was George Howe and was so cool. I didn’t mention this.

Malcolm taught history at St Edward’s from 1962 to 1999. Thirty-seven years. He was, by every account given that afternoon, a man of deep faith, inspiring teaching, selfless service. The tributes ran long. The praise was unqualified.

I ate three sandwich triangles and a very small square of cake.

Malcolm got me into Oxford. That’s not nothing. He and John Todd lit a fire for history that still burns. I acted in his Beggar’s Opera, joined his singing tours, absorbed a great deal about how to think. The debt is very real. But that afternoon I felt somehow outside the celebration of Malcolm’s life. A memorial service is not the place to raise alternative views. Everyone knows this. So I stood in the rain, and listened, and thought about Dick Bradley. Bradley became Warden of St Edward’s in the same term I arrived: Winter 1966. I was his last Senior Prefect. In March 1971, he was effectively forced to leave. At the end of the Spring Term. He couldn’t even finish the academic year.

Why? His marriage had failed, and he’d fallen in love with someone else. The Governors had, with great reluctance, ruled that a divorced headmaster could remain in post; they were clear that a remarried one could not. With Bradley determined to marry, he was left with no alternative but to go.

We raised £26 for his leaving present. I put in a fiver. A friend who’d recently left put in another. Even now I’m appalled.

Malcolm, from what I recall, did not regret Bradley’s departure.

I have thought about this often – and I recently reread the chapters Malcolm wrote in his history of the school about Bradley’s wardenship, published some forty years after the events. In them, and interrogating memories that are both imperfect and selective after more than fifty years, I think I understand a little better.

My feeling then was that Bradley had lost the respect of much of his Common Room. Malcolm was not alone in this. Was it disappointment in a Warden who seemed to have given up the struggle? Was it mischief – Malcolm undoubtedly enjoyed poking authority, even while being authority himself? Or was it simply that a man in trouble had become inconvenient, and his departure solved a problem? I don’t know. Perhaps all three. Memory is unreliable and motive is opaque, even to those who act. What I do know is that it was so much of its time. A divorced headmaster could stay; a remarried one could not. And so the institution, as all institutions always do, closed ranks.

Blair Worden was there in the rain that afternoon. He’d supervised my special subject – Commonwealth and Protectorate – at the end of my second year at Oxford. I confessed that I was the one who’d invented the story about Major-General Desborough falling off his horse. He roared with laughter. The young don he’d been fifty years ago hadn’t seen the funny side. Some transgressions soften with time. Others don’t.

Five visits to St Edward’s in fifty five years. Three of them memorial services. I was relieved, driving home in the rain, to shake the dust off my feet.

Malcolm gave me a great deal. I owe him. But gratitude and disquiet can sit side by side. They have to. And the disquiet, I’ve come to realise, is less about Malcolm than about Bradley: the abruptness of his leaving, the airbrushing out of his wardenship, the shame I know he and his family carried. That was the wound. Malcolm’s memorial simply surfaced it.

Warm lard has its uses. It soothes. It smooths.

What it cannot do is tell the whole truth.

A new world for the NHS

One of my favourite stories about my late and much loved mother-in-law involved her asking a CPSO (Community Police Support Officer) whether he was a “real policeman”?

Obviously no.

So reading about the government’s latest wheeze to address the entirely avoidable shortage of doctors (and nurses and NHS managers), I thought . . . Well, you’ll know what I thought.

Thank heavens for Boy (and Girl) Scouts . . .

Even turkeys know Christmas is coming

In The end of inevitability Jordan Furlong challenges the legal profession to think about its future. In a few short paragraphs he identifies the key issues that will shape how law is practised in the future. And it is not just that there are profound changes happening in the relationship between lawyers and their clients, but that it seems most lawyers are simply not aware of them.

It is a sobering post. For Furlong, it is that almost complete lack of awareness of the legal profession that is the real issue,

The one thing that concerns me most, as an observer of the extraordinary change in this marketplace, is that the majority of the profession has no idea what’s coming. Most of the lawyers with whom I’ve dealt over the past several years simply can’t envision a world where lawyers aren’t considered essential to the social and economic fabric. They might recognize that times are tougher and costs are rising and prices have topped out and clients are more demanding. They might be resentfully aware that providers outside the profession are entering the market with lower-price offerings, and they might grudgingly accept that technology allows things to be done faster and cheaper than they used to be. But they’re not putting it all together. They’re not following this road to its conclusion, because they can’t really see how the world could get along without us. The inevitably of lawyers is our fundamental precept, and it has become a mental block.

This is as true in the United Kingdom as it is in North America.

It is certainly difficult in the hurly-burly of practice to take time out to think about what we need to change to stay in the market; and the very fact that we are busy is itself a problem, because it allows us to think that things are, after all, OK: change is not something any of us are that eager to rush into. But choosing to ignore the problem won’t make it go away, and the clock is ticking. And just as Furlong ends his post, ” Lawyers should know better than anyone else what a ticking clock sounds like.”