Our friends Peter and Andrea Rothberg are visiting (since Thursday). They are back for a second time and we have just returned from a wonderful long weekend in Lisbon. (More about that in a different post.) We went to the Tate Modern to see the Sir Elton John photography exhibit which I wrote about earlier. We also had time to see some of the other permanent exhibits. We were in the Rothko Room, full of paintings that were originally painted for the Four Seasons restaurant in New York, when the museum closed and we were asked to leave. (Rothko cancelled the commissions and gave the works to the Tate. He committed suicide the week after they were installed.) I also discovered that the new wing of Tate Modern has a great view-point of London. See below.

“Art”: On the Friday after Andrea and Peter arrived, we went to the Old Vic to see “Art”, a play by the French playwright, Yazmina Reza, translated by Christopher Hampton. It is the 20th anniversary of its first production in London. (We saw it on Broadway with Alan Alda, Joe Morton and George Wendt sometime around 1999.) It is a play that is really about the relationships between three men. One of the three friends, Serge, has purchased an expensive, large painting that is entirely white. Serge, played by Rufus Sewall (probably best known for his recent portrayal of Lord M in the TV series “Victoria”) is a fan of this minimalist modern style and loves his painting. He invites his best friend, Marc (played by Paul Ritter), over and proudly shows it to him. Marc immediately hates it and is aghast that Serge bought it. He cannot conceal his alarm, anger and disgust. The rest of the play is about how their friendship is almost destroyed by the purchase of the painting. Marc feels betrayed and furious that Serge could have bought such a thing. And Serge is equally furious at what he sees as Marc’s condescending attitude and rigidity. Along the way, their other friend, Yvan (hysterically played by Tim West), finds himself in the middle of the argument. He tries to like the painting (even though he doesn’t really), which infuriates Marc and then infuriates Serge when he admits he doesn’t really like it that much. He becomes their punching bag as they fight with each other. It is a fascinating look at the nature of male friendship, as the rift caused by the disagreement about art escalates into increasingly hurtful statements about other, more personal subjects. And you could say that it is about men’s lack of empathy and the inability of individuals with strongly held beliefs to admit that someone with equally strong opposing beliefs may not be a fool. As the director’s notes point out, this second underlying theme has a great resonance today, in an England divided by Brexit and a world divided by Trump, where the opposing camps cannot bring themselves to even talk civilly to each other. It is wonderful and cleverly written in a style that is reminiscent of Stoppard. It takes a simple concept and creates a parable about life and friendship. And it manages the seemingly impossible by coming up with a resolution that does not seem contrived and is somehow satisfying. Another thing I’m going to miss about London: The Old Vic.

It Looks Like We Will Avoid Deportation: You may recall that we were somewhat concerned that our visas are scheduled to expire on the 9th of February, but we intend to keep living here until early April. We were concerned that Judie might be closely questioned upon our return from Lisbon and she had letters from the law firm explaining that she was now officially working in the New York office (and therefore no longer needs anything more than a visitor’s visa). The immigration law specialist hired by the firm seemed to think that there was a possibility that it would not work and we would have to leave or something. But, as it turned out, the Immigration person had no interest in Judie’s letters and just let us in on visitor’s visas with virtually no fuss at all. It was a relief for us, as this particular detail of our repatriation has been worrying us for weeks.

Brexit Update: May Wins, Labour in Disarray: This week the entire Breixt process leading to the UK leaving the EU became officially irreversible (although it has seemed like an unstoppable lava flow for months). In response to the High Court’s ruling that the Article 50 notice (beginning the process of leaving the EU) had to be approved by Parliament, the Conservative submitted a very short bill that gives Theresa May a blank check. The Tories were solidly behind it (except for Kenneth Clark, a voice crying out in the darkness that has become the Conservative Party) and beat back efforts by some MPS to amend the bill. The Scottish National Party was opposed. Corbyn and Labour found themselves in a difficult spot. Many of the traditional Labour constituencies in the Midlands and elsewhere voted heavily to leave and they were justifiably concerned that voting against the triggering of Article 50 might lead to an electoral rout. So Corbyn decided that Labour had to support the bill and ordered a “Three-line whip” be issued. (This is a message to the Labour MPs about an upcoming vote. If the message is underlined once, the members are urged to come and vote, underlined twice and the members are told that this is a very important matter. If it is underlined three times, the MPs are told that they must vote and are instructed on how they must vote.) About 50 Labour MPs defied Corbyn (and the three-line whip) and voted against the bill. They were from places that voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU and really had to oppose it. But this is simply not done in Parliament and this sort of rebelliousness is unusual. Several front-benchers in the shadow cabinet voted against the bill and therefore had to resign their positions. Why Corbyn couldn’t have given his members a “free vote”, avoiding the inevitable resistance is beyond me. It all just reinforces the pre-existing story line that he doesn’t know what he is doing and that Labour is in disarray. So May wins overwhelmingly (so overwhelmingly that there is no chance of the House of Lords doing anything) and the Brexit process will start in the next six weeks. The two-year negotiations are unlikely to go well or even be completed, so this could turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory for her.

A Brief Political Rant: We are living in such a weird time. A few hundred thousand votes and Hillary is President, there might be a Democratic majority in the Senate and all the pundits would be writing about the dismal future of the GOP. But for whatever reason, those votes did not materialize and we are faced with Trump, which would be bad enough for one lifetime, but also a Republican Party whose awful partisanship and refusal to govern has been rewarded. With Republicans in charge, one would expect all sorts of terrible things–giveaways to the rich, attempts to shred the safety net as much as possible, attacks on the EPA, the CFPB and Dodd-Frank. Elections have consequences and at least some of these horrible things will inevitably happen. I’m not sure that we can fight all of them. And I don’t know where Democrats would get by being simply the party of “No”, as the GOP was for six years, especially since they are in the minority. There has to be resistance, but it has to be smart and constructive resistance, with apositive message underlying it. And there are lines in the sand that must be drawn that will lead to bloody fights.

Trump is a sort of different matter. It is important to call him out on his endless false statements and the fact that his administration is utterly feckless and incompetent. I  personally have no real hope that the Republicans will impeach him, but I think he can and will be weakened. But to obsess on every stupid tweet and crazy statement seems also to be self-defeating. It is important to make some distinctions over the merely idiotic and venal things he says and the things he says that threaten tyranny. There really is a difference between complaining about Nordstom’s and threatening the judiciary. We are teetering on the edge of an abyss. It is not hard to envision a situation in which the USA slips into tyrrany. What we do as a country over the next several months and years will have an inordinate impact on the future of the world. This is all frightening in a way that Reagan or W were not.