Research Paper at City University, November 12th, on ”Clifford Hindley: The Scholar as Pederast and the Aestheticisation of Child Sexual Abuse”

I will be giving a research paper at City University, London (where I am a Lecturer in Music) on November 12th, 2014, in Room AG09, College Building (on St John Street), at 6:30 pm (preceded by another staff presentation by Laudan Nooshin, entitled ‘Sites of Memory: Public Emotionality, Gender and Nationhood in the Music of Googoosh’ at 5:30 pm). This relates to my research into the late priest, Home Office civil servant and musicologist/classical scholar Clifford Hindley, and is as follows.

‘Clifford Hindley: The Scholar as Pederast and the Aestheticisation of Child Sexual Abuse’

The mysterious  figure of J. Clifford Hindley, who died in 2006, is well-known to scholars of the music of Benjamin Britten for of a series of scholarly articles he published on Britten’s operas in the 1980s and 1990s. During the same period Hindley also published a few articles on Classical Greece, focusing upon Xenophon and Sappho. Less well-known is the fact that in the earlier part of his life, Hindley was an ordained priest who worked for a period in India and published a range of theological articles, then worked for a while at the Home Office in London, where he was head of the Voluntary Services Unit. This year, as part of wider investigations into organised sexual abuse, Hindley has been identified by former Home Office civil servant Tim Hulbert, who was Hindley’s junior at the department, as the individual responsible for ensuring that a total of £70 000 from Home Office funds was given to the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

In this paper, for which I draw upon experience and expertise both as a critical/historical musicologist and as a campaigner and researcher on the subject of organised child abuse (especially in the field of classical music), I consider the obsessive focus upon paedophile themes in Hindley’s writings themselves, and locate his jargon, aestheticisation and ideologies within a wider tradition of contemporary paedophile writing since the 1960s, for which the volume Greek Love (New York: Oliver Layton Press, 1964) by J.Z. Eglinton (Walter Breen), a member of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) who already had convictions for child abuse prior to the publication of this work, is a central text, leading to Kenneth Dover’s Greek Homosexuality (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978) – cited extensively by Hindley – which introduced the terms erastês and erômenos into the study of sexual exploitation of children, lending such activities a veneer of respectability through allusion to antiquity. I go on to consider this school of thought more widely in the context of a paedophile ‘sub-culture’ which  achieved some prominence in the 1970s and 1980s.

This paper draws upon and extends and expands some earlier work published on my blog Desiring Progress (https://ianpace.wordpress.com ); some of this specific research has been used by various national news programmes in the UK, whilst the work on Hindley was requested in order to brief members of the Home Affairs Select Committee in July 2014 in advance of their questioning of the Home Office Permanent Secretary Mark Sedwill on issues of historical PIE infiltration of his department.


Academia and Paedophilia 1: The Case of Jeffrey Weeks and Indifference to Boy-Rape

Over on the Spotlight blog, a series of important articles have been posted on paedophilia in academia, focusing on the work of sociologist Ken Plummer at the University of Essex, Len Davis, formerly Lecturer in Social Work at Brunel University, and Donald J. West, Professor of Clinical Criminology at the University of Cambridge. There is much more to be written on the issue of the acceptance of and sometimes propaganda for paedophilia in academic contexts; I have earlier published on the pederastic scholarly writings of Clifford Hindley (formerly a senior civil servant at the Home Office alleged to have secured funding for the Paedophile Information Exchange), as well as the pro-paedophile views of leading feminist and Cambridge University Lecturer Germaine Greer. In several fields, including sociology, social work, classical studies, art history, music, literature and above all gender and sexuality studies, there is much to be read produced in a academic environment, and published by scholarly presses, which goes some way towards the legitimisation of paedophilia. In July, Andrew Gilligan published an article on this subject as continues to exist in some academic summer conferences (Andrew Gilligan, ‘Paedophilia is natural and normal for males’, Sunday Telegraph, July 6th, 2014), whilst Eileen Fairweather has written about how easily many in academia were taken in by the language and rhetoric of PIE, as they ‘adroitly hijacked the language of liberation’, presented themselves in opposition to ‘patriarchy’ and would brand critics homophobic (Eileen Fairweather, ‘We on the Left lacked the courage to be branded ‘homophobic’, so we just ignored it. I wish I hadn’t’, Telegraph, February 22nd, 2014). Back in 1998 Chris Brand, Lecturer in Psychology at the University of Edinburgh, was removed from his post after advocating that consensual paedophilia with an intelligent child was acceptable (see Alastair Dalton, ‘Brand loses job fight over views on child sex’ The Scotsman, March 25th, 1988, reproduced at the bottom of this), but such cases are rare.

I would never advocate censorship of this material or research of this type, but I believe it to be alarming how little critical attention this type of material appears to receive, perhaps still because it is taboo in certain circles to criticise anything which in particular attaches itself to the cause of gay rights (just as victims of female abusers, or researchers into the subject, find themselves under continual attack from some feminists who would prefer for such abuse to continue than for it to disturb their tidy ideologies – see my earlier post on child abuse and identity politics).

I have over a period of time been assembling information on what I would call a paedophile ‘canon’ of writings, many of them produced by academics, which use similar ideologies and rhetoric to attempt to normalise and legitimise paedophilia. Detail on this will have to wait until a later date; for now, I want to draw attention to some of the writings of Emeritus Professor of Sociology and University Director of Research at South Bank University Jeffrey Weeks, previously Executive Dean of Arts and Human Sciences and Dean of Humanities. Rarely has Weeks’ work been subject to critique of this type (one notable exception is Mary Macleod and Esther Saga, ‘A View from the Left: Child Sexual Abuse’, in Martin Loney, Robert Bocock, et al (eds), The State or the Market: Politics and Welfare in Contemporary Britain (London: Sage Books, 1991), pp. 103-110, though this is problematic in other respects).

Weeks was described in a hagiographic article from 2008 as ‘the most significant British intellectual working on sexuality to emerge from the radical sexual movements of the 1970s’ (Matthew Waites, ‘Jeffrey Weeks and the History of Sexuality’, History Workshop Journal, Vol. 69, No. 1 (2010), pp. 258-266), having been involved the early days of the Gay Liberation Front and their branch formed at the London School of Economics in 1970. He published first in Gay News, and was a founding member of the Gay Left collective; their ‘socialist journal’ included several pro-paedophile articles (all can be downloaded here – see in particular issues 7 and 8). Weeks’ first book, Socialism and the New Life: the Personal and Sexual Politics of Edward Carpenter and Havelock Ellis (London: Pluto Press, 1977) was co-authored with Sheila Rowbotham; Rowbotham wrote on Edward Carpenter, who was a key member of the ‘Uranian’ poets, who have been described as ‘the forerunners of PIE’; the volume completely ignored any of this.

In the preface to the paedophile volume The Betrayal of Youth: Radical Perspectives on Childhood Sexuality, Intergenerational Sex, and the Social Oppression of Children and Young People (London: CL Publications, 1986), editor Warren Middleton (aka John Parratt, former vice-chair of the Paedophile Information Exchange and editor of Understanding Paedophilia, who was later jailed for possession of indecent images), acknowledged Weeks gratefully alongside members of the PIE Executive Committee and others who had ‘read the typescripts, made useful suggestion, and, where necessary, grammatical corrections’.

Here I am reproducing passages from four of Weeks’ books, which should make his positions relatively clear. The first gives a highly sanitised view of the paedophile movements PAL and PIE, accepting completely at face value the idea that they were simply ‘a self-help focus for heterosexual as well as homosexual pedophiles, giving mutual support to one another, exchanging views and ideas and encouraging research’, whose ‘method was the classical liberal one of investigation and public debate’ (rather than a contact group for abusers and for sharing images of child abuse, as was well-known and documented by this stage), and more concerned about the tabloid reaction than about their victims. It is a lousy piece of scholarship as well, considering this is a revised edition from 1997 (the book was earlier published in 1977, 1980 and 1993); Weeks breaks one of the first principles of scholarship by shelving information which does not suit his a priori argument, thus saying nothing about the various members of PIE who had been convicted and imprisoned (or fled the country) for offences against children, including most of its leading members, claiming that the involvement of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality was due to its being ‘gratutiously dragged in’, ignoring the fact of their having made public statements of support at their 1974 conference (of which Weeks, at the centre of this movement, would have been well-aware). The second, on ‘intergenerational sex’ (an academic term used to make paedophilia sound more acceptable) is backed up by a range of references which is almost like a who’s who of paedophile advocates, many treated as if reliable scholarly sources rather than the child abuse propaganda they are. In common with many left-liberal writers on paedophilia, he does not endorse sex between adult men and young girls, but applies a very different set of standards when boys are concerned. The third passage is more subtle, appearing to distance Weeks from the view of J.Z. Eglinton and others, but again (drawing upon Brian Taylor’s contribution to the volume Perspectives on Paedophilia) ends up trying to make distinctions in such a way that some child abuse is made less serious. The fourth takes an angle familiar from Peter Righton and others; as abuse mostly takes place in the family, the risks from other types of paedophiles end up being little more than a moral panic.

Weeks’ minimisation of concern about sexual exploitation of boys, and concomitant greater sympathy with gay abusers than their victims, resonates with the view coming from the Labour Party at the moment, with the Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper determined to make child abuse purely an issue affecting girls. Furthermore, the Labour Deputy Leader Harriet Harman, as is now well-known, was involved at the centre of the National Council for Civil Liberties when they were closely linked to PIE (whose membership were overwhelmingly adult males looking to have sexual relations with boys). Under General Secretary Patricia Hewitt, NCCL submitted a document in 1976 to the Criminal Law Revision Committee, arguing amongst other things that ‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage. The Criminal Law Revision Committee should be prepared to accept the evidence form follow-up research on child ‘victims’ which show that there is little subsequent effect after a child has been ‘molested’’, echoing PIE’s own submission on the subject. Harman was not involved with NCCL until two years later, but there is nothing to suggest policy changed during her time or she had any wish to change it, whilst during her tenure NCCL went on to advertise in PIE’s house journal Magpie, and had Nettie Pollard, PIE member No. 70, as their Gay and Lesbian Officer. This was the heyday of PIE, and the support of NCCL was a significant factor. Harman, quite incredibly, went on to make paedophile advocate Hewitt godmother to her sons. Cooper is of a different generation, but all her pronouncements suggest the same contemptuous attitude towards young boys, seeing them only as threats to girls and near-animals requiring of taming, rarely thinking about their needs nor treating them as the equally sensitive and vulnerable people they are; with this in mind, abuse of boys is an issue she almost never mentions. It is alarming to me that both Harman and Cooper have parented sons and yet appear to be entirely unwilling to accept that boys deserve equal love and respect, nor keen to confront the scale of organised institutional abuse of boys

Though considering the number of stories involving Labour figures alleged to have abused or colluded with the abuse of young boys (I think of the cases in Leicester, Lambeth, the relationship of senior Labour figures to PIE, not just Harman, her husband Dromey, and Hewitt, but also former leadership candidate Bryan Gould, who made clear his endorsement for the organisation (see also this BBC feature from earlier this year; the relationship of the late Jo Richardson to the organisation also warrants further investigation), not to mention the vast amount of organised abuse which was able to proceed unabated in Islington children’s homes when the council was led by Margaret Hodge, who incredibly was later appointed Children’s Minister, the allegations around former Speaker of the House of Commons George Thomas aka Lord Tonypandy, and some other members of the New Labour government who have been identified as linked to Operation Ore; and the support and protection afforded to Peter Righton by many on the liberal left), it is not surprising if the Labour frontbench want to make the sexual abuse of boys a secondary issue. This is unfortunately a common liberal-left view, and a reason to fear the consequences of some such people being in charge of children at all, whether as parents or in other roles. There are those who see young boys purely as a problem, little more than second-best girls, to be metaphorically beaten into shape, though always viewed as dangerous, substandard, and not to be trusted; this in itself is already a type of abuse, but such a view also makes it much easier to overlook the possibility their being sexually interfered with and anally raped (not to mention also being the victims of unprovoked violence) – the consequences are atrocious. Many young boys were sexually abused by members of the paedophile organisation that Harman, Hewitt, Dromey et al helped to legitimise (I am of a generation with many of the boys who appeared in sexualized pictures aged around 10 or under in the pages of Magpie; I was fortunate in avoiding some of their fate, others were not); it is right that they should never be allowed to forget this, and it thoroughly compromises their suitability for public office. The Labour Party and the liberal left in general, have a lot of work to do if they are not to be seen as primary advocates for and facilitators for boy rape. In no sense should this be seen as any type of attack on the fantastic work done by MPs such as Simon Danczuk, Tom Watson or John Mann, or many other non-politicians working in a similar manner; but the left needs rescuing from a middle-class liberal establishment who are so blinkered by ideology as to end up dehumanising and facilitating the sexual abuse of large numbers of people. Weeks, Plummer, West, Davies, Greer, Millett, Hindley, and others I will discuss on a later occasion such as Mary McIntosh, are all part of this tendency.



Jeffrey Weeks, Coming Out: Homosexual Politics in Britain from the Nineteenth Century to the Present, revised and updated edition (London & New York: Quartet Books, 1997)

‘Even more controversial and divisive was the question of pedophilia. Although the most emotive of issues, it was one which centrally and radically raised the issue of the meaning and implications of sexuality. But it also had the disadvantage for the gay movement that it threatened to confirm the persistent stereotype of the male homosexual as a ‘child molester’. As a result, the movement generally sought carefully to distance itself from the issue. Recognition of the centrality of childhood and the needs of children had been present in post-1968 radicalism, and had found its way into early GLF ideology. The GLF gave its usual generous support to the Schools Action Union, a militant organization of schoolchildren, backed the short-lived magazine Children’s Rights in 1972, campaigned against the prosecutions of Oz (for the schoolchildren’s issue) and the Little Red Schoolbook. But the latter, generally a harmless and useful manual for children, illustrated the difficulties of how to define sexual contact between adults and children in a non-emotive or moralistic way. In its section on this, the Little Red Schoolbook stressed, rightly, that rape or violence were rare in such contacts, but fell into the stereotyped reaction by talking of ‘child molesting’ and ‘dirty old men’: ‘they’re just men who have nobody to sleep with’; and ‘if you see or meet a man like this, don’t panic, go and tell your teacher or your parents about it’. [28]

But the issue of childhood sexuality and of pedophile relationships posed massive problems both of sexual theory and of social practice. If an encounter between child and adult was consensual and mutually pleasurable, in what way could or should it be deemed harmful? This led on to questions of what constituted harm, what was consent, at what age could a child consent, at what age should a child be regarded as free from parental control, by what criteria should an adult sexually attracted to children be judged responsible? These were real questions which had to be faced if any rational approach was to emerge, but too often they were swept aside in a tide of revulsion.

A number of organizations in and around the gay movement made some effort to confront these after 1972 on various levels. Parents Enquiry, established in South London in 1972 by Rose Robertson, attempted to cope with some of the problems of young homosexuals, particularly in their relationships with their parents. Her suburban middle-class respectability gave her a special cachet, and with a series of helpers she was able to help many young people to adjust to their situation by giving advice, holding informal gatherings, mediating with parents and the authorities. [29] More radical and controversial were two pedophile self-help organizations which appeared towards the end of 1974: PAL (originally standing for Pedophile Action for Liberation) and PIE (Pedophile Information Exchange). Their initial stimulus was the hostility they felt to be directed at their sexual predilections within the gay movement itself, but they both intended to act as a self-help focus for heterosexual as well as homosexual pedophiles, giving mutual support to one another, exchanging views and ideas and encouraging research. The sort of gut reaction such moves could provoke was illustrated by a Sunday People ‘exposé’ of PAL, significantly in the Spring Bank Holiday issue in 1975. It was headed ‘An Inquiry that will Shock every Mum and Dad’, and then, in its boldest type, ‘The Vilest Men in Britain’. [30] Despite the extreme hyperbole and efforts of the paper and of Members of Parliament, no criminal charges were brought, since no illegal deeds were proved. But it produced a scare reaction in parts of the gay movement, especially as CHE had been gratuitously dragged in by the newspaper.

Neither of the pedophile groups could say ‘do it’ as the gay liberation movement had done, because of the legal situation. Their most hopeful path lay in public education and in encouraging debate about the sexual issues involved. PIE led the way in this regard, engaging in polemics in various gay and non-gay journals, conducting questionnaires among its membership (about two hundred strong) and submitting evidence to the Criminal Law Revision Committee, which was investigating sexual offences. [31] PIE’s evidence, which advocated formal abolition of the age of consent while retaining non-criminal provisions to safeguard the interests of the child against violence, set the tone for its contribution. Although openly a grouping of men and women sexually attracted to children (and thus always under the threat of police investigation), the delicacy of its position dictated that its method was the classical liberal one of investigation and public debate. Significantly, the axes of the social taboo had shifted from homosexuality to conceptually disparate forms of sexual variation. For most homosexuals this was a massive relief, and little enthusiasm was demonstrated for new crusades on wider issues of sexuality. (pp. 225-227)

28. Sven Hansen and Jasper Jensen, The Little Red School-book, Stage 1, 1971, p. 103. See the ‘Appeal to Youth’ in Come Together, 8, published for the GLF Youth Rally, 28 August 1971.
29. See her speech to the CHE Morecambe Conference, quoted in Gay News, 21.
30. Sunday People, 25 May 1975. For the inevitable consequences of this type of unprincipled witchhunt, see South London Press, 30 May 1975: ‘Bricks hurled at “sex-ring” centre house’, describing an attack on one of the addresses named in the Sunday People article.
31. There is a brief note on PIE’s questionnaire in New Society, vol. 38, No. 736, 11 November 1976, p. 292 (‘Taboo Tabled’).



Jeffrey Weeks, Sexuality and its Discontents: Meanings, Myths & Modern Sexualities (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985).

Intergenerational sex and consent

If public sex constitutes one area of moral anxiety, another, greater, one, exists around intergenerational sex. Since at least the eighteenth century children’s sexuality has been conventionally defined as a taboo area, as childhood began to be more sharply demarcated as an age of innocence and purity to be guarded at all costs from adult corruption. Masturbation in particular became a major topic of moral anxiety, offering the curious spectacle of youthful sex being both denied and described, incited and suppressed. ‘Corruption of youth’ is an ancient charge, but it has developed a new resonance over the past couple of centuries. The real curiosity is that while the actuality is of largely adult male exploitation of young girls, often in and around the home, male homosexuals have frequently been seen as the chief corrupters, to the extent that in some rhetoric ‘homosexual’ and ‘child molesters’ are coequal terms. As late as the 1960s progressive texts on homosexuality were still preoccupied with demonstrating that homosexuals were not, by and large, interested in young people, and even in contemporary moral panics about assaults on children it still seems to be homosexual men who are investigated first. As Daniel Tsang has argued, ‘the age taboo is much more a proscription against gay behaviour than against heterosexual behaviour.’ [30] Not surprisingly, given this typical association, homosexuality and intergenerational sex have been intimately linked in the current crisis over sexuality.

Alfred Kinsey was already noting the political pay-off in child-sex panics in the late 1940s. In Britain in the early 1960s Mrs Mary Whitehouse launched her campaigns to clean up TV, the prototype of later evangelical campaigns, on the grounds that children were at risk, and this achieved a strong resonance. Anita Bryant’s anti-gay campaign in Florida from 1976 was not accidentally called ‘Save Our Children, Inc.’. Since these pioneering efforts a series of moral panics have swept countries such as the USA, Canada, Britain and France, leading to police harassment of organisations, attacks on publications, arrests of prominent activists, show trials and imprisonments. [31] Each panic shows the typical profile, with the escalation through various stages of media and moral manipulation until the crisis is magically resolved by some symbolic action. The great ‘kiddie-porn’ panic in 1977 in the USA and Britain led to the enactment of legislation in some 35 American states and in Britain. The guardians of morality may have given up hope of changing adult behaviour, but they have made a sustained effort to protect our young, whether from promiscuous gays, lesbian parents or perverse pornographers. [32]

From the point of view of moral absolutism intergenerational sex poses no problem of interpretation. It is wrong because it breaches the innocence necessary for mature development. The English philosopher, Roger Scruton, suggested that we are disgusted by it ‘because we subscribe, in our hearts, to the value of innocence’. Prolonged innocence is the prerequisite to total surrender in adult love. Erotic love, he argues, arises from modesty, restraint and chastity. This means ‘we must not only foster those necessary virtues, but also silence those who teach the language which demeans them.’ [33] So ‘intolerance’ is not only understandable but virtually necessary—there are no liberal concessions here.

Liberals and radicals on the other hand have found it more difficult to confront the subject. It does not easily fit into the rhetoric of rights—whose rights, and how are they to be expressed: the child’s, the adult’s? Nor can it be dealt with straightforwardly by the idea of consent. Kinsey argued that in a sense this was a non issue: there was no reason, except our exaggerated fear of sexuality, why a child should be disturbed at seeing the genitalia of others, or at being played with, and it was more likely to be adult reactions that upset the child than the sexual activity itself. [34] This has been echoed by the advocates of intergenerational sex themselves. David Thorstad of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) argued that ‘if it feels good, and the boy wants it and enjoys it, then I fail to see why anyone besides the two persons involved should care.’ Tom O’Carroll, whose Paedophilia: The Radical Case is the most sustained advocacy of the subject, suggested that:

The usual mistake is to believe that sexual activity, especially for children, is so alarming and dangerous that participants need to have an absolute, total awareness of every conceivable ramification of taking part before they can be said to consent…there is no need whatever for a child to know ‘the consequences’ of engaging in harmless sex play, simply because it is exactly that: harmless. [35]

There are two powerful arguments against this. The first, put forward by many feminists, is that young people, especially young girls, do need protection from adult men in an exploitative and patriarchal society, whatever the utopian possibilities that might exist in a different society. The age of consent laws currently in operation may have degrees of absurdity about them (they vary from state to state, country to country, they differentially apply to girls and boys, and they are only selectively operated) but at least they provide a bottom line in the acceptance of appropriate behaviour. This suggests that the real debate should be about the appropriate minimum age for sex rather than doing away with the concept of consent altogether. [36] Secondly, there is the difficult and intricate problem of subjective meaning. The adult is fully aware of the sexual connotations of his actions because he (and it is usually he) lives in a world of heavily sexualised symbols and language. The young person does not. In a recent study of twenty-five boys engaged in homosexual paedophile relations the author, Theo Sandfort, found that ‘Potentially provocative acts which children make are not necessarily consciously intended to be sexual and are only interpreted by the older persons as having a sexual element.’ [37] This indicates an inherent and inevitable structural imbalance in awareness of the situation. Against this, it might be argued that it is only the exalted cultural emphasis we place on sex that makes this an issue. That is undoubtedly true, but it does not remove the fact of that ascribed importance. We cannot unilaterally escape the grid of meaning that envelops us.

This is tactily accepted by paedophile activists themselves who have found it necessary to adopt one or other (and sometimes both) of two types of legitimation. The first, the ‘Greek love’, legitimation basically argues for the pedagogic value of adult-child relations, between males. It suggests—relying on a mythologised version of ancient Greek practices—that in the passage from childhood dependence to adult responsibilities the guidance, sexual and moral, of a caring man is invaluable. This position is obviously paternalistic and is also often antihomosexual; for it is not the gay nature of the relationship that is stressed, but the age divide and the usefulness of the experience for later heterosexual adjustment. The second legitimation relies on the facts of childhood sexuality. O’Carroll carefully assesses the evidence for the existence of childhood sex to argue for the oppressiveness of its denial. [38] But of course an ‘is’ does not necessarily make an ‘ought’, nor does the acceptance of childhood sex play inevitably mean the toleration of adult-child relations.

It is difficult to confront the issue rationally because of the series of myths that shroud the topic. But all the available evidence suggests that the stereotypes of intergenerational sex obscure a complex reality. [39] The adult is usually seen as ‘a dirty old man’, typically ‘a stranger’ to the assaulted child, as ‘sick’ or an ‘inhuman monster’. Little of this seems to be true, at least of those we might describe as the political paedophile. He is scarcely an ‘old man’ (the membership of the English Paedophile Information Exchange, PIE, varied in age from 20 to over 60, with most clustered between 35 and 40); he is more likely to be a professional person than the average member of the population (only 14 per cent of PIE members were blue collar workers); he is more often than not a friend or relation of the child; and to outward appearances is not a ‘special type of person’ but an apparently healthy and ordinary member of the community. His chief distinguishing characteristic is an intense, but often highly affectionate and even excessively sentimental, regard for young people. [40]

The sexual involvement itself is typically seen as being an assault on extremely young, usually pre-pubertal, people. The members of PIE, which generally is preoccupied with relations with pre-pubertal children, seem chiefly interested in boys between 12 and 14, though heterosexual paedophiles tended to be interested in girls between 8 and 10. This is less startling than the stereotype of babies barely out of the cradle being assaulted but poses nevertheless difficult questions about where protection and care ends and exploitation begins. Most members of NAMBLA, on the other hand, which has attracted obloquy in the USA as great as PIE has attracted in Britain, have a quite different profile. They appear to be chiefly interested in boys between 14 and 19. As Tom Reeves, a prominent spokesman for man/boy love, has put it:

My own sexuality is as little concerned with children, however, as it is with women. It is self-consciously homosexual, but it is directed at boys at that time in their lives when they cease to be children yet refuse to be men. [41]

Self-identified ‘boy-lovers’ like Reeves scarcely fit into any conceivable picture of a ‘child molester’. They carefully distinguish their own practices from sex between men and girls which ‘seems to be a reprehensible form of power tripping as it has been reported by women’; and stress the beneficial aspects for adult and young partners of the sexual relationship.

When the official age of consent in France is 15 for boys and girls in heterosexual and homosexual relations (compared to 16 for girls in Britain, and 21 for male homosexuals), and when in the 1890s Krafft-Ebing fixed on 14 for the dividing line between sexually mature and immature individuals, [42] the fear that NAMBLA is attempting a corruption of young people seems excessive.

The young people themselves are typically seen as innocent victims. Certainly, many children are cruelly assaulted by adults, but in relations involving self-identified paedophiles or ‘boy lovers’ there seems to be no evidence of either cruelty or violence. Sandfort found that in his sample the boys overwhelmingly experienced their sexual activities as positive. The most common evaluative terms used were ‘nice’, ‘happy’, ‘free’, ‘safe’, ‘satisfied’, and even ‘proud’ and ‘strong’; and only minimally were negative terms such as ‘angry’, ‘sad’, ‘lonely’ used. Even when these negative terms were used, it was largely because of the secrecy often necessary and the knowledge of hostile norms and reactions, not because of the sexual contact itself. [43] There is strong evidence that the trauma of public exposure and of parental and police involvement is often greater than the trauma of the sex itself. Moreover, many adult-child relations are initiated by the young person himself. A young member of NAMBLA was asked ‘You can be desperate for sex at 13?’ He replied, ‘Oh yes’. [44] Force seems to be very rare in such relations, and there is little evidence amongst self-declared paedophiles or ‘boy lovers’ of conscious exploitation of young people.

All this suggests that intergenerational sex is not a unitary category. Brian Taylor has distinguished eight possible categories which pinpoints the existence of ‘paedophilias’ rather than a single ‘paedophilia’. There are the conventional distinctions between ‘paedophiles’ (generally those interested in prepubertal sex partners), ‘pederasts’ (those interested in boys) and ‘ephobophiles’ (those interested in adolescents). But distinctions can also be made on gender of the older person or the younger person and along lines of homosexuality and heterosexuality. This variety suggests we need to be equally discrete in our responses. [45] There are three continuums of behaviour and attitude which interweave haphazardly. Firstly, there is a continuum of beliefs and attitudes, from the actual violent assaulter at one end to the political paedophile at the other. These can not readily be put in the same class for approval or disapproval. Most people brought before the courts for child abuse are heterosexual men who usually view their girl victims as substitutes for real women. Most activists who court publicity (and risk imprisonment themselves, as happened to Tom O’Carroll of PIE in 1981) have adopted a political identity, which sometimes does not coincide with their actual sexual desires (both NAMBLA and PIE had members interested in older teenagers) but is built around an exaggerated respect for children. [46] It is not obvious that all people involved in intergenerational sex should be treated in the same way by the law or public opinion if intentions or desires are very distinct.

A second continuum is of sexual practices. Some researchers have found coitus rare. It seems that the great majority of heterosexual paedophilia consists of ‘sex play’, such as looking, showing and fondling, and much homosexual involvement seems to be similar. Tom O’Carroll has suggested that these sexual distinctions should be codified, so that intercourse would be prohibited before a certain minimum age of twelve. [47] But bisecting these nuances, problematical in themselves, are two other crucial distinctions, between boy partners and girl, and between heterosexual and homosexual relations. There is a strong case for arguing that it is not the sex act in itself which needs to be evaluated, but its context. It is difficult to avoid the justice of the feminist argument that in our culture it is going to be very difficult for a relationship between a heterosexual man and a young girl to be anything but exploitative and threatening, whatever the sexual activity. It is the power asymmetry that has effect. There is still a power imbalance between an adult man and a young boy but it does not carry the socio-sexual implications that a heterosexual relation inevitably does. Should these different types of relation carry the same condemnation?

The third continuum covers the age of the young people involved. There is obviously a qualitative difference between a 3-year-old partner and a 14-year-old and it is difficult to see how any sexual order could ever ignore this (even the PIE proposals, which first sparked off the panic about paedophile cradle snatching in Britain, actually proposed a set of protections for very young children). ‘Sex before eight, or it’s too late’, the reputed slogan of the American René Guyon Society, founded in 1962 to promote intergenerational sex, is not likely to inspire widespread support, because it imposes sex as an imperative just as now our moral guardians would impose innocence. There is a strong case for finding non-legal means of protecting young children, as Tom O’Carroll has suggested, because it is clear that the law has a damaging and stigmatising impact. [48] But protection of the very young from unwanted attentions will always be necessary. The difficult question is when does protection become stifling paternalism and ‘adult oppression’. Puberty is one obvious landmark, but the difficulty of simply adopting this as a dividing point is that physiological change does not necessarily coincide with social or subjective changes. It is here that it is inescapably necessary to shift focus, to explore the meanings of the sex play for the young people involved.

Kate Millett has powerfully underlined the difficulties of intergenerational sex when adult/child relations are irreducibly exploitative, and pointed to the problems of a paedophile movement which is arguing for the rights of adults. What is our freedom fight about? she asks. ‘Is it about the liberation of children or just having sex with them?’ [49] If a progressive sexual politics is fundamentally concerned with sexual self-determination then it becomes impossible to ignore the evolving self-awareness of the child. That means discouraging the unwelcome imposition of adult meanings and needs on the child, not simply because they are sexual but because they are external and adult. On the other hand, it does mean providing young people with full access to the means of sexual knowledge and protection as it becomes appropriate. There is no magic age for this ‘appropriateness’. Each young person will have their own rhythms, needs and time scale. But the starting point can only be the belief that sex in itself is not an evil or dirty experience. It is not sex that is dangerous but the social relations which shape it. In this context the idea of consent takes on a new meaning. There is a tension in consent theory between the political conservatism of most of its adherents, and the radical voluntarism implicit in it. 50 For the idea of consent ultimately challenges all authority in the name of free self-determination. Certain categories of people have always been deemed incapable of full consent or of refusing ‘consent’—women in marriage, certain children, especially girls, under a certain age, classes of women in rape cases. By extending the idea of consent beyond the narrow limits currently employed in minimum age or age of consent legislation, by making it a positive concept rather than simply a negatively protective or gender-dichotomised one, it may become possible to realize that radical potential again. That would transform the debate about intergenerational sex, shifting the focus away from sex in itself to the forms of power in which it is enmeshed, and the limits these inscribe for the free play of consent. (pp. 223-231)

29. See, for example, Daniel Tsang, ‘Struggling Against Racism’ in Tsang (ed.), The Age Taboo, pp. 161-2.
30. Ibid., p. 8. There are plentiful examples of the automatic association made between male homosexuality and child molesting. In the year I write this, 1983, there has been a rich crop of them in Britain, with the low point being reached in the Brighton rape case, August 1983, where a deplorable assault on a young boy led to a rapacious press attack on the local gay community and legal action against members of the Paedophile Information Exchange, who were in no way connected with the case. The moral panic had found its victims; calm was restored; but the three men who actually assaulted the child were never found.
31. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, p. 117, note 16; Mary Whitehouse, Cleaning-up TV. From Protest to Participation, London, Blandford Press, 1967, and A Most Dangerous Woman?, Tring, Herts, Lion Publishing, 1982; Anita Bryant, The Anita Bryant Story. For general commentaries on events see the articles in Tsang, The Age Taboo; Altman, The Homosexualization of America, pp. 198ff; Mitzel, The Boston Sex Scandal, Boston, Glad Day Books, 1980; Tom O’Carroll, Paedophilia: The Radical Case, London, Peter Owen, 1980, ch. 12; Ken Plummer, ‘Images of Paedophilia’ in M. Cook and G.D. Wilson (eds), Love and Attraction: An International Conference, Oxford, Pergamon, 1979; Major events included the Revere ‘Sex Scandal’ in Boston, the raid on Body Politic following its publication of the article ‘Men Loving Boys Loving Men’ in Dec. 1977; the ‘kiddie porn’ panic of 1977; the trial of Tom O’Carroll and others in England for conspiracy to corrupt public morals in 1981.
32. Pat Califia, ‘The Age of Consent; An Issue and its Effects on the Gay Movement’, The Advocate, 30 October 1980, p. 17. See also Florence Rush, ‘Child Pornography’ in Lederer (ed.), Take Back the Night, pp. 71-81; Illinois Legislative Investigating Commission, Sexual Exploitation of Children, Chicago, The Commission, 1980 (see further references in Tsang, op. cit., pp. 169-70); and on similar events in Britain Whitehouse, A Most Dangerous Woman?, ch. 13, ‘Kiddie Porn’, pp. 146ff.
33. Roger Scruton, The Times (London), 13 September 1983.
34. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, p. 121.
35. Interview by Guy Hocquenghem with David Thorstad in Semiotext(e) Special: Large Type Series: Loving Boys, Summer 1980, p. 34; Tom O’Carroll, Paedophilia, p. 153.
36. See, for example, ‘“Lesbians Rising” Editors Speak Out’ in Tsang, op. cit., pp. 125-32; Stevi Jackson, Childhood and Sexuality, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1982, ch. 9. See also, Elizabeth Wilson’s comments on the debate about proposals to lower the age of consent in England in What is to be Done about Violence against Women? p. 205.
37. Theo Sandfort, The Sexual Aspects of Paedophile Relations: The Experience of Twenty-Five Boys, Amsterdam, Pan/Spartacus, 1982, p. 81.
38. Kenneth Plummer, ‘The Paedophile’s Progress’ in Brian Taylor (ed.), Perspectives on Paedophilia. See J.Z. Eglinton, Greek Love, London, Neville Spearman, 1971 for a classic statement of the first legitimation, and O’Carroll, Paedophilia, especially chs 2 and 5 for the second.
39. For an overview of these stereotypes (and the facts which rebut them) to which I am very much indebted, see Plummer, ‘Images of Paedophilia’.
40. Glenn D. Wilson and David N. Cox, The Child-Lovers. A Study of Paedophiles in Society, London and Boston, Peter Owen, 1983; Peter Righton, ch. 2: ‘The Adult’ in Taylor, Perspectives in Paedophilia; Parker Rossman, Sexual Experiences between Men and Boys, London, Maurice Temple Smith, 1976.
41. Tom Reeves, ‘Loving Boys’ in Tsang, op. cit., p. 27; the age range given on p. 29. On PIE members’ interests see Cox and Wilson, op. cit., ch. II.
42. Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, p. 552: ‘By violation of sexually immature individuals, the jurist understands all the possible immoral acts with persons under fourteen years of age that are not comprehended in the term “rape”.’
43. On paedophilia as abuse see Florence Rush, The Best Kept Secret: Sexual Abuse of Children, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1980; Robert L. Geiser, Hidden Victims: The Sexual Abuse of Children, Boston, Beacon Press, 1979. For alternative opinions: Sandford, op. cit., pp. 49ff; cf. Morris Fraser, ch. 3, ‘The Child’ and Graham E. Powell and A.J. Chalkley, ch. 4, ‘The Effects of paedophile attention on the child’ in Taylor (ed.), Perspectives on Paedophilia.
44. See interview with the then 15-year-old Mark Moffat in Semiotext(e), loc. cit, p. 10; cf. Tom Reeves’s account of being cruised by two 14-year-olds in Tsang, op. cit., p. 30; and O’Carroll, ch. 4, ‘Paedophilia in Action’ in Paedophilia.
45. Taylor (ed.), Perspectives on Paedophilia, ‘Introduction’, p. xiii. In the rest of the discussion I shall, however use the term ‘paedophile’ to cover all categories as this is the phrase adopted most widely as a political description: ‘Boy lover’ is specific, but exclusive.
46. On offences see P.H. Gebhard, J.H. Gagnon, W.B. Pomeroy and C.V. Christenson, Sex Offenders, New York, Harper & Row, 1965; J. Gagnon, ‘Female child victims of sex offences’, Social Problems, no. 13, 1965, pp. 116-92. On identity questions see Plummer, ‘The paedophile’s progress’.
47. O’Carroll, Paedophilia, pp. 120, 118.
48. Ibid., ch. 6, ‘Towards more Sensible Laws’, which examines various proposals, from Israel to Holland, for minimising the harmful intervention of the law; compare Speijer Committee, The Speijer Report, advice to the Netherlands Council of Health concerning homosexual relations with minors, English Translation, London, Sexual Law Reform Society, n.d.
49. Interview with Kate Millett by Mark Blasius in Semiotext(e) Special, loc. cit, p. 38 (also printed in Tsang (ed.), op. cit.).
50. Carole Pateman, ‘Women and Consent’, Political Theory, vol. 8, no. 2, May 1980, pp. 149-68.



Jeffrey Weeks, Sexuality, third edition (London & New York: Routledge, 2010; first edition 1986)

4. The limits of consent: paedophilia
The power relations that sex can involve are most dramatically illustrated by the question of sex between the generations, or paedophilia. Few topics arouse such fear and anxiety in contemporary societies. The ‘paedophile’ has become a symbol of predatory evil, a synonym indeed not only for child abuser but also in many cases for child abductor and even murderer. The peculiar horror invoked by the abuse of innocence, by the imposition of adult desires on the vulnerable, powerless child, speaks for a culture that is profoundly anxious about the boundaries and differences between adults and children, and has become increasingly concerned with protecting the young as long as possible. Yet this has not always been the case.

In the late nineteenth century paedophilia was lauded by some for its pedagogic possibilities – the so-called Greek love justification: in the passage from childhood dependence to adult responsibility, guidance, sexual and moral, of a caring man can be invaluable, it was argued. It was further legitimated in the twentieth century by the supposed facts of childhood sexuality: sexology itself has revealed the wide extent of childhood sexual potentiality including the existence of infantile masturbation. If something is so natural, and omnipresent, should it be as rigidly controlled as childhood sexuality is today? And again, if it is natural, then surely it cannot be harmful even if it takes place with adults. As Tom O’Carroll, a militant supporter of inter-generational sex (who ended up in prison for his pains) wrote ‘. . . there is no need whatever for a child to know “the consequences” of engaging in harmless sex play, simply because it is exactly that: harmless’. [6]

For the vast majority of the population this is not harmless play, it is simply child sex abuse. It involves powerful adults using their experience and wiles to gain satisfaction from exploiting children. The growing sensitivity to abuse is the result of long campaigns, often led in Western countries by feminists, or by campaigners who experienced abuse themselves. This has become a global phenomenon, with international campaigns to end the traffic in children and the worst abuses of sex tourism. This without doubt marks an advance in society’s awareness of the reality of exploitation, and the power of adults over children. Yet there is something rather odd in the ways in which various late modern societies, from Australia to Europe to the USA, have focused on the figure of the anonymous paedophile rather than on the hard reality that most abuse of children is carried out by a close relative or family friend, or perhaps by a priest, as a wave of scandals from the UK and Ireland to Australia and the USA has recently underscored. [7]

Despite, or perhaps because of, the emotiveness of the issue, it is important to be as rational and dispassionate as possible in looking at what is involved. Age is an ambiguous marker. Is there an ideal age at which consent becomes free, rather than abusive, and a relationship becomes consensual, rather than coercive? Certainly the vast majority of us could agree that it should not be 3 or 8, but what about 12 or 14 or 15 which are the ages of consent in various European countries? Laws vary enormously, and sometimes affect boys and girls quite differently. Brian Taylor has pointed to the existence of eight possible subcategories of inter-generational sex, depending on the age of those involved, the distinction of gender, the nature of the sexual proclivity, and the interaction of all three (Taylor 1981). This suggests that there are paedophilias, not a single paedophilia, and the social response should be sensitive to these distinctions, even as it focuses rightly on protecting the young and vulnerable. (pp. 95-97)

6 O’Carroll (1980: 153). For the various legitimations offered, see the discussion in Plummer (1981).
7 There is an excellent debate on the implications of the early twenty-first century anxiety about paedophilia in Loseke et al. (2003). For feminist perspectives, see Reavey and Warner (2003).



Jeffrey Weeks, The World We Have Won: The Remaking of Erotic and Intimate Life (London & New York: Routledge, 2007)

‘Through stories – of desire and love, of hope and mundane reality, of excitement and disappointment – told to willing listeners in communities of meaning, people imagine and reimagine who and what they are, what they want to become (Plummer 1995 [Plummer, K. (1995) Telling Sexual Stories: Power, Change and Social Worlds, London: Routledge], 2003 [Plummer, K. (2003) Intimate Citizenship: Private Decisions and Public Dialogues, Seattle: University of Washington Press]). Of course, all this does not mean that anything goes. It is noticeable that as some barriers to speaking are removed or redefined new ones are erected. Paedophilia began to speak its name in the 1970s, but has been redefined as child abuse and trebly execrated in the 2000s.’ (p. 10)

‘The age of consent may be an ambiguous barrier for young people themselves but it is a fraught one for many adults, usually men. The age of consent itself is constructed in terms of protection of young girls, and it assumes male agency (Waites 2005a [Waites, M. (2005a) The Age of Consent: Young People, Sexuality and Citizenship, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan]). But the growing awareness of the extent of child sex abuse poses wider questions about the power relations between adults and children (see Reavey and Warner 2003 [Reavey, P. and Warner, S. (eds) (2003) New Feminist Stories of Child Sexual Abuse: Sexual Scripts and Dangerous Dialogues, London and New York, Routledge]; O’Connel Davidson 2005 [O’Connell Davidson, J. (2005) Children in the Global Sex Trade, Cambridge: Polity Press]). The government has responded to widespread anxieties about breach of trust on the part of adults by attempting to write into law notions of protection that should operate in certain types of adult child relationships, such as teaching (Bainham and Brooks-Gordon 2004 [‘Reforming the Law on Sexual offences’, in Brooks-Gordon, B., Gelsthorpe, L., Johnson, M. and Bainham, A. (eds) (2004) Sexuality Repositioned: Diversity and the Law, Oxford, and Portland, OR: Hart Publishing, pp. 291-296]; Epstein et al. 2004 [Epstein, D., Johnson, R. and Steinberg. D.L. (2004) ‘Thrice Told Tales: Modernising Sexualities in the Age of Consent’ in Steinberg, D.L. and Johnson, R. (eds) (2004) Blairism and the War of Persuasion: Labour’s Passive Revolution, London: Lawrence & Wishart, pp. 96-113). These have the habit of all attempts at redrawing boundaries of becoming fiery touchstone issues, as the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, Ruth Kelly, found out in early 2006. The discovery by the press that there were teachers in schools who had previously been accused of abusing children threatened to engulf her and end her career, though she could realistically have had very little knowledge of how her civil servants operated the register of offenders (Doward 2006a:8-9; [Doward, J. (2006a), ‘Sex Scandal that Engulfed Kelly’, Observer, 15 January, pp. 8-9] see also Aaronovitch 2006: 21) [Aaronovitch, D. (2006), ‘The Paedophile Panic: Why We Have Reached Half Way to Bonkers Island’, The Times, 12 January, 21] Behaviours which were once regarded as natural and even healthy (childhood nudity, for example) have become fraught with menace, as parents and carers have discovered when their holiday photographs of naked children playing on the beach have been processed, and police summoned.

Many of these anxieties had been brought to the surface following the murder of the 8-year-old Sarah Payne in summer 2000. The News of the World’s campaign, in response to this, of naming and shaming alleged paedophiles, in turn stimulated a local vigilante campaign led by mothers on the Paulsgrove housing estate in Hampshire (Bell 2003: 108-28 [Bell, V. (2003), ‘The Vigilantt(e) Parent and the Paedophile: The News of the World Campaign 2000 and the Contemporary Governmentality of Child Sex Abuse’’, in Reavey and Warner 2003, pp. 108-28]). This raised in turn a number of crucial issues: the role of the press in stirring up moral panic, the role of class in configuring the response to the working-class mothers’ action, the role of women in confronting an alleged lack of communication from the state, and the role of the state itself in responding to acute anxiety, ignorance and fear. But as important was the shift in the perception of sexual risk and the management of risk that was taking place. As Rose (1999: 206) [Rose, N. (1999), Governing the Soul: The Shaping of the Private Self (2nd edn), London and New York: Free Associations Books] points out, outrage at the neglect of abuse emerged most strongly from the very group in society that was once deemed most likely to abuse children – the working class itself. And in practice, of course, the vast majority of cases of abuse take place within families or are by someone known to the child. Yet the anger focused on the dangerous stranger, the paedophile, bearer of a particular psychopathology and history, completely detached from the family. A similar process has been at work in relation to so-called paedophile priests in the Roman Catholic Church. A scandal that the church had long hidden, it raised crucial questions about the religious calling, church discipline, priestly celibacy and simple trust. Yet in the church’s eyes it became less about abuse than about Catholic attitudes towards homosexuality, gay priests and the like. When in 2006 a new Pope sought to ban gays from taking up the priesthood, it was widely seen as a response to the paedophile scandal (Loseka 2003: 13 [‘”We hold these Truths to be Self-evident”: Problems in Pondering the Paedophile Priest problem’, Sexualities 6 (1), February, 6-14]). Anxiety has become individualized, thus expunging the most dangerous sites for the production of abuse, the home, the local community, and it appears the Catholic church, from the story. (pp. 153-154)


The Scotsman
, March 25th, 1988
Alastair Dalton, ‘Brand loses job fight over views on child sex’

THE controversial academic Chris Brand, sacked by Edinburgh University for promoting his views on paedophilia, yesterday lost his appeal against his dismissal.

The independent QC asked by the university to hear the appeal agreed that the psychology lecturer’s behaviour had amounted to gross misconduct and ruled that his dismissal could not be said to have been improper or inappropriate.

Mr Brand, 54, last night described the university’s actions as “treacherous”, but refused to say whether he planned to take his case to an industrial tribunal or the courts.

He was dismissed for gross misconduct last August by the university principal, Professor Sir Stewart Sutherland, after he published on the Internet his view that consensual sex between adults and children was acceptable as long as the child was intelligent.

Mr Brand had previously caused a storm after his 1996 book, The g Factor, claimed there was genetic proof black people had lower IQs than white people. It prompted students to disrupt his lectures and the book was withdrawn by the publisher. The university found no grounds for disciplinary action against him then, although the principal described his views as “obnoxious”.

Gordon Coutts, QC, who conducted Mr Brand’s two-day appeal hearing last week, stated : “The appeal fails. I reject all the revised amended grounds of appeal. I find that the appeal does not raise any question of academic freedom.”

He added: “In pursuit of his objectives, he (Mr Brand) set out to promote controversy. In that he succeeded but cannot now complain if the effect of his behaviour has been to render his continued employment by the university impossible.

“The principal of the university did not dismiss him for views he held; he was dismissed because it was established that his behaviour made it impossible for him to work within a university department.”
Sir Stewart said yesterday he was “naturally content” that “an independent legal expert has endorsed in the clearest possible terms” the findings of the university’s disciplinary tribunal and his subsequent decision to sack Mr Brand.

He said: “I would repeat that it is for aspects of his conduct, not his opinions, that Mr Brand has been dismissed. Mr Brand has again, in recent months, been reported in the press as alleging this process was an attack on academic freedom, though this was not argued by his counsel at the appeal hearing. It has not and never has been such an attack, as independently confirmed by the appeal decision.

“Neither I nor my colleagues at this university have sought in any way to censor Mr Brand’s researched conclusions, on ethnic background and intelligence, for example.

“But it was made clear to him, well before he publicised views on paedophilia, that he also had responsibilities to act with care, whether in a departmental, teaching or wider situation – advice which he apparently chose to ignore.”

Mr Brand condemned the university. He said: “Their behaviour has been shameful.

They have been treacherous to their own academic staff and a disgrace to academia.”

Mr Brand, a former prison service psychologist, had stated on his web site: “Academic studies and my own experience as a choirboy suggest that non-violent paedophilia with a consenting partner over 12 does no harm so long as the paedophiles and their partners are of above-average intelligence and educational level.”

He was suspended in November 1996 and a three-member disciplinary tribunal was appointed the following April to consider the charges against him.

The tribunal ruled that Mr Brand had compromised his position, and his teaching had fallen below the standards expected of him. It further ruled that the university’s reputation had not been damaged by Mr Brand’s publications on the Internet, but a disciplinary offence had been committed.

Mr Brand, a London-born father of three, had been at Edinburgh University since 1970.

Last night Nicola Owen, convener of the Anti-Nazi League Society at Edinburgh University, said: “It’s wonderful news.

It vindicates all the students who fought to get Mr Brand removed from the university.”


The Trial of Michael and Kay Brewer and the Death of Frances Andrade, and the Aftermath, 2013

[The following is an extensively redacted version of a wider document on abuse in musical education written in May-June 2013, edited in June 2014, for the purposes of briefing several politicians on the subject. Other sections from this document were included in my previous post ‘Reported Cases of Abuse in Musical Education, 1990-2012, and Issues for a Public Inquiry’, 31/12/13, updated 12/8/14, from which I reproduce the conclusions here]


The Trial of Michael and Kay Brewer

None of the cases of abuse in musical education (see my earlier post on the subject), however, would command anything like the same degree of shock and public attention as the trial, conviction and sentencing of Michael and Kay Brewer in 2013, which has served as a major catalyst for a wider debate on the dangers of abuse in musical education. As mentioned earlier, Michael Brewer had been Director of Music at Chetham’s since 1975, appointed at the age of just 30 to the most senior musical position in the school, and had remained in that position until resigning in 1994 (though he was still working on some collaborative projects with two teams from Chetham’s in coaching and leading workshops for hearing and vision-impaired children on a project based around Sir Michael Tippett’s A Child of our Time in 2005 – see Susan Elkin, ‘Breaking sound barriers’, Daily Mail, 29/3/05). The complainant, Frances Andrade, nee Shorney, who studied at Chetham’s as a boarder from 1978 to 1982 (leaving at the age of 17), had been known for some time to others concerned about abuse in musical education for her own campaigning activities. After hearing about Roscoe’s stance against Layfield in 2002, Andrade contacted Roscoe, to tell him about her abuse at the hands of Brewer (As revealed by Roscoe interviewed by Channel 4 News, 26/3/13). She had been pursuing the cases not only of Brewer but also various other teachers at Chet’s, and had spoken both to police and the Headteacher at Chetham’s, Clare Moreland (previously Claire Hickman) about these (Information communicated to the author by e-mail from a close friend of Andrade, February 2013; also through communications with Martin Roscoe and others).

In 2009 (sometimes reported as the summer of 2011), Andrade had confided in a friend, singing teacher Jenevora Williams, who worked with choirs in St Paul’s and Westminster Abbey, and was teacher-in-residence at the National Youth Choir of Great Britain (NYCGB), that she had been sexually abused by Michael Brewer and his then-wife Kay from the age of 14 when at Chetham’s (Nick Britten and Duncan Gardham ‘Frances Andrade ‘traumatised’ by reliving abuse of 30 years ago’, The Telegraph, 8/2/13; Russell Jenkins & Lucy Bannerman, ‘Choirmaster’s victim wanted to put past behind her’, The Times, 9/2/13; Nick Britten, ‘Suicide of choirmaster’s victim’, The Telegraph, 9/2/13; Tom Henderson and James Tozer, ‘Choirmaster who abused girls and the twisted wife who joined in’, Daily Mail, 9/2/13; James Tozer and Nazia Parveen, ‘Ordeal of Rape Trial’, Daily Mail, 9/2/13). Brewer was at this time still the principal conductor of NYCGB (of which singers ranged between the ages of 9 and 22), which he himself had co-founded and served as artistic director since 1983 (see ‘National Youth Choir’ and also this site); he was also internationally well-known for his choral work with young people and led the BBC programme Last Choir Standing in 2008 (see ‘Interview with Mike Brewer’, BBC, 17/7/08). Without Andrade’s permission, Williams (whose daughter Andrade was teaching violin) took this information to the police in 2011, on account of fear for the safety of children with whom Brewer was still working, saying later ‘I’d been wrestling with my conscience as to the most appropriate course of action…I knew raking it up would cause difficulties for people but I am a teacher and disclosure of sexual abuse is something we are trained to deal with’ (see Williams’ one interview after the verdict, in James Murray and Eugene Henderson, ‘I told police of abuser to save other children’, Sunday Express, 10/2/13.). Andrade would come to say in court that she was ‘being put under pressure to give evidence’ (ibid).

Michael Brewer was arrested around August 2011 (see Lucy Bannermann and Richard Morrison, ‘Paedophile choirmaster Michael Brewer worked with children after his arrest’, The Times, 15/2/13, in which it is asserted that there was an eight month gap between Brewer’s arrest and being charged), and following the police investigation, both he and Kay Brewer were charged with rape and multiple cases of indecent assault in April 2012 (Kim Pilling, ‘Choir Director charged with rape’, Press Association Mediapoint, 27/4/12. At the time of the arrest, one former Chetham’s student, Kathryn Turner, wrote as a comment on the blog of Norman Lebrecht that ‘Sexual abuse by staff was endemic at Chetham’s school which I attended between 1969-1980’. See Lebrecht, ‘Dreadful news: Chethams teacher and wife are charged with student rape’, Slipped Disc, 27/4/12). The NYCGB suspended Brewer from his position following his being charged and quickly issued a statement on behalf of their chairman of trustees, Professor Chris Higgins, that ‘These allegations relate to events over 30 years ago, before the choir was founded, and have nothing to do with the NYCGB nor Mike’s time as artistic director’ (‘Choir Director charged with student while at top music school’, The Telegraph, 28/4/12). Chetham’s themselves, understandably unable to comment on any specifics following the arrest, issued the following statement:

“Chetham’s School of Music takes all matters regarding the safeguarding of children extremely seriously and the welfare of our students is of paramount concern to all staff and governors.
“We are aware that Michael Brewer has been charged with offences that are alleged to have happened while he was employed by the school many years ago.
“We are co-operating with this investigation but while this matter is ongoing it would not be appropriate to comment further.”
(cited in Russell Jenkins, ‘Music school couple in court on rape charge’, The Times, 8/6/12).

The trial of the Brewers took place beginning on January 15th, 2013, with Michael Brewer charged with one case of rape and 13 counts of indecent assault, and Kay Brewer charged with one count of indecent assault and aiding and abetting rape. Brewer was alleged to have regularly sexually abused Andrade in his office, touching her private parts, in his camper van, kept on school grounds, whilst he would also ask her to perform oral sex upon him outside of school, sometimes by a canal. She herself was said to have felt at the time, as a vulnerable teenager, that the abuse was a ‘small price to pay for the affection’; he had used ‘his power, influence and personality to seduce her’, using ‘flattery and affection’; Peter Cadwallader, prosecuting, had described Brewer’s personality as ‘dynamic and very charismatic’. After Kay Brewer had learned about Michael’s sexual interactions with Andrade, she was said to have confronted her when she visited their house (which appeared to be a regular occurrence, including after Andrade had left the school, at which time this particular event was said to have occurred), and said that she herself (Kay) had always wanted a sexual relationship with a woman, and so that Andrade ‘owed her’. Despite Andrade’s protestations that she was not interested, Kay made her go upstairs and performed sexual activity upon her, with Michael present and Andrade tied to a bed loosely with a belt (though apparently able to escape if required); after this Andrade was required to show Kay what she had done with Michael earlier, and he had non-consensual sexual intercourse with her. From the beginning of the trial, it was made clear that Andrade had had a troubled childhood, and was rebellious and drawn to drink from a young age, though was academically and musically talented (Kim Pilling, ‘Music School Boss denies Rape’, Press Association Mediapoint, 15/1/13; Russell Jenkins, ‘Choir director and wife ‘sexually assaulted pupil’’, The Times, 15/1/13).

Furthermore, Brewer was said to have pinned another 17-year old girl to a wall during a school trip, telling her ‘you want it really, don’t you?’, though no sexual activity resulted after the girl ran off, and had had a sexual affair with a further girl, then aged 16 in the early 1990s (involving highly explicit comments about her legs and breasts, leading to her being asked to strip topless, and Brewer exposing himself when she was in his office), leading to his being asked to resign from the school after being discovered by the then-headmaster (Peter Hullah) (Pilling, ‘Music School Boss denies Rape’).

Andrade herself first appeared in court on the second and third days (January 16th and 17th – see Chal Milmo, ‘Violinist found dead after testifying against her abuser’, The Independent, 8/2/13) and told the court that she now realised that she was in the hands of paedophiles, detailing how her relationship with Brewer had proceeded from kisses through intimate touching to full sex (intensifying when she was 15), with Brewer using various techniques of flattery and seduction, saying:

I felt nurtured in many ways, I felt cared for. I felt special, I was very flattered. I did not feel at the time I was a victim. It was a relationship that developed in a completely normal way. We would kiss, he would touch me.

Andrade also revealed how she had earlier been abused by an uncle as a child, and had not known any type of other relationship before Brewer. She described how he liked her to perform oral sex upon him whilst he drove, and how Kay Brewer apparently knew everything and also said how she ‘loved’ her. After leaving the school to study abroad, she continued to receive letters from Brewer, but lost interest after finding a new boyfriend. Andrade said that she had relegated the abuse to ‘a place where I could emotionally handle things’, traumatised by those others who would be affected by it, and had initially not wanted to go to the police herself, but had changed her perspective after being asked by detectives if the allegations were true. She was apparently suspended from the school for bad behaviour, and at this point had gone to live with the Brewer family (see below for further information on this which came to the author’s attention subsequent to the trial), and would travel with them on holiday and stay with them rather than other pupils on school trips. She also described Kay Brewer asking her to touch her breasts after undergoing reduction surgery. She had also confronted Brewer in 2002 about what he had done at the time of the Layfield affair, and given him an ultimatum to confess to the police (which he did not do) (Kim Pilling, ‘Woman tells of Music Boss Sex Abuse’, Press Association Mediapoint, 16/1/13; Russell Jenkins, ‘Choir leader sexually abused musician, court hears’, The Times, 16/1/13). She affirmed that it had been a friend who had told police, and that she had initially been unhappy (Jenkins, ‘Choir leader sexually abused musician’; a further report, James Tozer and Mario Ledwith, ‘Choirmaster began relationship with rape victim when she was just 14’, Daily Mail, 16/1/13, suggests that she told a ‘doctor’ about this, and that person told police, but this is probably just a confusion arising from the fact that Williams possessed a doctorate), whilst also mentioning that she had thought Brewer to be the ‘bee’s knees’ and a special teacher ‘who needed to be worshipped’ by pupils (James Tozer, ‘Choirmaster tied girl aged 16 to his bed and raped her while his wife watched’, Daily Mail, 16/1/13). Also especially notable in terms of Andrade’s perception of Brewer’s legitimising of abuse from other teachers was the following comment, made in the context of discussing Layfield:

This was where my anger came out. Several friends of mine had been raped. I rang Mike and blamed him for it, because he was having a relationship with me and hid what was going on at the school because of it. (cited in ‘I was subjected to brutal sex attack by former Chets boss and his wife’, Manchester Evening News, 17/1/13).

The following day, however, Andrade underwent intensive cross-examination at the hands of defence counsel for Michael Brewer, Kate Blackwell QC, who told the complainant that she was ‘indulging in the realms of fantasy’ and that she had ‘told this jury a complete pack of lies about the visit to this house’ (referring to the night when the rape was alleged to have taken place), asking how she could have ‘spent the night lying next to two of your rapists?’ Andrade replied in strong terms, claiming that she had felt guilty, had not known how to get out of the situation, and attacking Blackwell for having ‘no feminine understanding of what someone goes through like that. What shock your body goes through. How you almost feel you deserve it’. Bernadette Baxter, who represented Kay Brewer, also suggested that the allegations were ‘a complete fantasy’ which were ‘designed to get attention’, to which Andrade replied ‘If I wanted attention I would have done this an awfully long time ago’. One interesting detail from this day’s proceedings, however, was Brewer’s admission that ‘I’m always in a room with an adult now because I recognise I have a problem with being attracted to younger girls’ (Kim Pilling, ‘Woman ‘lied over choir boss rape”, Press Association Mediapoint, 17/1/13).

After Andrade’s defence of her own allegations, things went worse for Brewer the following day, January 18th, with the appearance in court of the woman who as a girl at Chetham’s (becoming head girl) had had a sexual relationship with him in 1994. Evoked by the prosecution in order to prove a pattern of unhealthy interest on Brewer’s part in teenage girls, the woman claimed that whilst she did not see the affair at the time as abuse (and recalled Brewer saying to her ‘I would not want you to think I am abusing my position’, which she then agreed he was not), but saw things somewhat differently now. She portrayed a rather sordid world of encounters in Brewer’s office and practice rooms, then how she attempted to end it before going to university, with Brewer resisting this, then described him exposing himself to her, being bought presents including matching watches (and also being given Winnie the Pooh books by Kay), and how he had admitted to her being involved with one other pupil (having frequently made comments about various pupils), who he called a ‘bad girl who seduced me into bed’. Then they were found together in Brewer’s office by Hullah (after a housemistress had been alerted, who herself started to listen at doors), leading to Brewer’s resignation, after which point he tried further to contact her, which she also resisted. In conversations with the authorities, the then-girl and Brewer agreed to maintain that their relationship consisted entirely of hugging and kissing, and it became agreed by Hullah (who appeared in court the same day) after he had discovered the two that a different reason would be given for Brewer’s resignation. Hullah himself described Brewer as ‘zany and unpredictable’ but with a ‘reputation as a highly professional voice trainer’, who apparently helped pupils with personal problems and strove to help them achieve high things (Kim Pilling, ‘Music Teacher ‘fondled student’, Press Association Mediapoint, 18/1/13. I personally recall it being suggested by some individuals (including a then-teacher at the school) at the time of Brewer’s resignation that this was due to some type of scam he had going with a manufacturer of strings or bows).

Following another day of proceedings, January 23rd, in which Michael Brewer mostly spoke to his defence counsel about his feelings of desolation at the break-up of his relationship with the girl in 1994 (using the phrase that he ‘effectively committed suicide’ after the girl’s mother recorded and passed to Hullah a phone conversation, in which Brewer promised to protect the girl for her remaining time at school), resignation (but then being awarded the OBE very soon afterwards) and also gave his own description of Andrade:

I saw her as a very talented, vivacious musician but I was already aware of her problems and her lack of discipline. She found practice very difficult.
Her creativity was exceptional and her application was really poor.
She was vivacious, dynamic, commanding on stage (but) underneath was insecure, depressive, hysterical and a fantasist.

Brewer went on to deny the charges of sexual abuse (or any sexual encounters) with Andrade, and alluded to the phone call he had received in 2001 [sic] from her accusing him of abusing her and calling for him to give himself up to the police, saying that he had contacted a solicitor and been advised not to respond until he received something in writing. Otherwise he mostly went on to describe his earlier life and career (Kim Pilling, ‘I was in love with teen – choir man’, Press Association Mediapoint, 23/1/13. By this time the number of press articles reporting the trial was increasing, but most of them essentially reiterated some of the material provided by the Press Association).

Perhaps most significant in this day’s proceedings was the fact that Judge Martin Rudland ordered that five of the charges of indecent assault upon a child must be recorded as not guilty due to insufficient evidence about the age of Andrade at the time of the allegations (ibid). This left eight further counts of indecent assault and a rape charge, but it is believed by some that the information about the dropped charges was received by Andrade (now back at her home in Guildford, following the trial through the media) that evening, leading her erroneously to believe that all charges had been dropped. At some point that evening or night, Andrade took her own life via an overdose , without leaving a suicide note; an iPad was found on her bed next to her by her husband Levine, with a story saying how these five charges had been dropped (Her body was found on January 24th. See Milmo, ‘Violinist found dead after testifying against her abuser’).

The extent to which Andrade’s death was provoked by this misunderstanding , or by trauma induced by being branded a fantasist and described in such unflattering terms by Brewer that day, or for that matter in response to Brewer’s own metaphorical evocation of the notion of suicide (bearing in mind that Andrade had had a previous history of suicide attempts) remains unclear, even after the recent inquest in which the coroner felt unable to deliver a verdict of suicide, on the grounds that he was unsure Andrade intended to kill herself (see Gemma Mullin, ‘Coroner slams mental health services for failing concert violinist who dies days after giving evidence against predatory paedophile former choirmaster’, Daily Mail, 25/7/14; Andy Crick, ‘Suicide is ruled out on victim of pervert’, The Sun, 26/7/14; ‘Violinist Frances Andrade ‘failed’ by mental health services’, BBC News England, 25/7/14; ‘Violinist Frances Andrade ‘did not kill herself”, BBC News UK, 25/7/14). However, news of the death quickly spread around the music world – together with the clear knowledge that this must not be mentioned publicly until after a verdict (and would be kept secret from the jury) – causing widespread shock and horror.

As the judge struggled with dealing with the fact of the chief complainant having taken her own life during the course of the trial, no further proceedings ensued until January 29th. Also at this stage, some further private discussions developed between myself, Roscoe, another woman who was a contemporary of mine at Chetham’s, D, and Philippa Ibbotson, a freelance musician and also occasional columnist on musical matters (but who had also written an article on sexual abuse – Philippa Ibbotson, ‘The hidden offenders’, The Guardian, 3/9/08) for the Guardian. I had already resolved at this stage to organise a petition calling for a public inquiry into abuse at Chetham’s and possibly elsewhere, having been aware of the allegations about Ling for over 20 years, and knowing some things also about Layfield, as well as recalling from my time at the school various male teachers having had sexual relationships with sixth-form girls (and in one case a woman having had a relationship with a boy); some of this was at the time gossip and hearsay, but often relatively clear to many who saw some of the ‘couples’ together, their body language and so on.

The editor of The Guardian, Alan Rusbridger, had been a pupil at Cranleigh School whilst John Vallins, headmaster of Chetham’s from 1974 to 1992, had been a housemaster and English teacher there; Rusbridger had invited Vallins to write a regular Country Diary for the newspaper following the headmaster’s retirement (John Vallins, ‘The Countryman and the Editor’, Cranleigh Contact No. 33 (April 2007), p. 5), which still continues to the present day. Nonetheless, Rusbridger was prepared to back comprehensive coverage not only of the continuing Brewer trial, but also wider stories about Chetham’s to be published after the trial’s conclusion. During the following two weeks, Ibbotson worked together with the young Northern editor of the paper, Helen Pidd, in consultation with Roscoe, myself and D (all of whom had connections to networks of former alumni from the school), determined to use this opportunity to reveal more of the wider abuse which had gone on at Chetham’s, concentrating above all on the cases of Layfield, Ling and Bakst (about whom evidence was coming to light of widespread groping and molestation of the majority of his female students over a period of almost three decades), seeking first-hand accounts such as would be demanded by The Guardian’s lawyers before allowing named accusations to be printed.

The trial finally resumed on January 29th with now relatively banal denials and cross-examinations of Michael Brewer by the prosecuting counsel concerning both the affair with Andrade and the former head girl in 1994, in which Brewer denied the former and minimised the extent of the latter (though admitting ‘chats’ with her when she was stripped to the waist) he did however admit that Andrade had stayed with his family at their house in Chorlton, south Manchester, allegedly because she had become too disruptive to remain in boarding (Pat Hurst, ‘No interest in schoolgirls: accused’, Press Association Mediapoint, 29/1/13; Helen Pidd, ‘Choir master accused of raping girl admits affair with another pupil’, The Guardian, 29/1/13; Russell Jenkins, ‘Music director enjoyed ‘wonderful’ chats with student stripped to the waist’, The Times, 29/1/13). Kay Brewer appeared in court the following day and tearfully denied any sexual contact with Andrade when questioned about the alleged rape, but admitting giving the girl in 1994 the Winnie the Pooh book, inscribed with a comment ‘Don’t worry about things, he is just a normal human being with all the same insecurities and doubts as you, love Kay’. By this time Michael and Kay Brewer had become estranged), and Kay described how she hoped this would provide another lasting relationship for him, whilst denying that he slept around and drawing attention to her own churchgoing activities (Kim Pilling, ‘Ex-wife denies ‘abetting’ rape’, Press Association Mediapoint, 30/1/13; Chris Riches, ‘Tearful wife denies helping choirmaster to rape girl, 18’, The Express, 31/1/13).

Earlier that week, the former Deputy Headmaster of Chetham’s, Brian Raby (who had retired in 1985), had been scheduled to appear as a character witness for Michael Brewer, but was dropped in favour of John Vallins, who was asked if aware of Brewer’s indiscretions with Andrade being ‘the talk of the school’, and of the deputy head calling in various students to make inquiries, both of which Vallins denied, saying of the later ‘I feel confident he would have passed on to me anything like that if he thought it merited serious concern’ (Pilling, ‘Ex-wife denies ‘abetting rape”).

Other figures provided character references for both of the Brewers. Lady Eatwell OBE, previously Suzi Digby nee Watts, founder of The Voices Foundation and conductor of multiple choirs, as well as a former judge on the BBC show Last Choir Standing which featured Brewer so prominently, spoke of him as ‘the world’s biggest influence in choral music for the young’, who had made the UK choral movement ‘one of the jewels in our crown’. Eatwell said that ‘Mike’ was ‘deeply concerned with the development of young people’, that ‘His personal integrity is 100 percent intact’ and ‘I’ve never heard a hint of impropriety’ (Riches, ‘Tearful wife denies helping choirmaster to rape girl, 18’). Conductor, flautist and music teacher Anastasia Micklethwaite described Brewer as a ‘wonderful man’ who had been an ‘inspiration to thousands of musicians across the world’, whilst harpsichordist Robyn Koh, a contemporary of Andrade’s at Chetham’s who had become her birthing partner and godparent to her sons, claimed Andrade had been known for being ‘prone to exaggeration’, and had never told her of being abused by the Brewers (Helen Pidd, ‘Ex-wife knew choirmaster accused of rape had affair with another student’, The Guardian, 30/1/13). Two different priests, Rev Richard Gilpin of St Clement Church in Cholrton, and Rev Stephen Brown of St Peter’s in Haslingden, spoke up for Kay Brewer, calling her ‘a very caring and responsible person’ and ‘sensitive, reliable and trustworthy’ (Riches, ‘Tearful wife denies helping choirmaster to rape girl, 18’; ‘Vicars in praise of shamed pair’, The Express, 9/2/13). Brewer’s second (and current) wife Sandra called Andrade ‘manic, hysterical and very loud’ when she had called and demanded to speak to her in 2001, but said that Brewer had revealed his relationship leading him to leave the school, and called him ‘a gentleman’ (‘Choirmaster admits being in love with sixth former’, Manchester Evening News, 30/1/13). Jenevora Williams, however, appeared to attest to her reasons for going forward to the police with the information provided her by Andrade (claiming that Andrade had agreed that she could pass on her name), and the moral dilemma she had faced, though also pointing out that she knew of no present incidents involving Brewer (Kim Pilling, ‘Teacher ‘wrestled with conscience”, Press Association Mediapoint, 8/2/13. This release is somewhat misleading as it gives the impression that Andrade had appeared again in court, when she was already dead by this point).

After a further delay occasioned by a juror having to be absent for several days, the jury retired following summings-up. Following two days of deliberations, they returned with a verdict on February 8th, finding Brewer guilty of five of the charges of sexual assault, and Kay Brewer guilty of one, though clearing both of the charge of rape (Nick Britten, ‘Woman sexually assaulted by choirmaster killed herself after giving evidence against him’, The Telegraph, 8/2/13).


The Aftermath of the Brewer Trial – Further Information on Chetham’s and Elsewhere

Press coverage following the verdict was overwhelmingly focused upon the dreadful news of Andrade’s death (See Nick Britten, ‘Woman sexually assaulted by choirmaster killed herself after giving evidence against him’, The Telegraph, 8/2/13; Nick Britten and Duncan Gardham, ‘Frances Andrade ‘traumatised’ by reliving abuse of 30 years ago’, The Telegraph, 8/2/13; Russell Jenkins and Lucy Bannermann, ‘Sex abuse victim killed herself after trial ordeal’, The Times, 9/2/13; Nick Britten and Duncan Gardham, ‘Destroyed by reliving abuse she hid for 30 years’, The Telegraph, 9/2/13.), which could now be published (and Andrade could be named as she was dead). Her son Oliver (one of four children) revealed his mother’s earlier suicide attempts, and claimed that her death had come about as a result of her having been called a ‘liar’ and ‘fantasist’ at the court. He also revealed that she had been advised by police not to receive any type of therapy until after the end of the case, which had dragged on for almost two years and become a big strain, and went onto criticise various aspects of the court system in such cases (Lauren Turner and Kim Pilling, ‘Teacher ‘let down’ by court system’, Press Association Mediapoint, 8/2/13; Kim Pilling and Emma Clark, ‘CPS defends itself over abuse case’, Press Association Mediapoint, 9/2/13), criticisms which were taken up by numerous other commentators, some focusing upon the harsh cross-examination she had undergone at the hands of Kate Blackwell, and various drawing upon comments from police chiefs, lawyers, politicians and rape counsellors (see Cahal Milmo, ‘Violinist found dead after testifying against her abuser’, The Independent, 8/2/13; James Tozer and Nadia Parveen, ”This feels like rape all over again’: Violinist driven to suicide by ordeal of trial after being branded a ‘liar and fantasist’ by woman QC’, Daily Mail, 8/2/13; Joan Smith, ‘For the victim trials can be a second ordeal’, The Independent, 8/2/13; Helen Pidd, Philippa Ibbotson and David Barry, ‘Sexual abuse victim’s suicide sparks call for review of court procedures’, The Guardian, 9/2/13; Nick Britten, ‘Suicide of choirmaster’s victim: Victim’s court ordeal raises questions over pressure on witnesses’, The Telegraph, 9/2/13; James Tozer and Nazia Parveen, ‘Driven to Suicide’, Daily Mail, 9/2/13; Chris Riches, ‘Suicide of choir director’s sex victim’, The Express, 9/2/13; Dan Thompson, ‘My tragic mum was driven to suicide by being branded liar in Chetham’s rape trial. Trial showed a dark past at Chet’s’, Manchester Evening News, 9/2/13; Elizabeth Sanderson and Tom Hendry, ‘My wife killed herself because she was on trial, not the choirmaster’: Husband’s anguished account of how abused wife spiralled to suicide after court ordeal’, Daily Mail, 9/2/13; Jerry Lawton, ‘Sex victim suicide after trial ordeal: Tragic violinist accused of lying takes own life’, Daily Star, 9/2/13; Stephen White, ”Cross-examination made me feel I’d been raped all over again’: Violinist who killed herself after giving evidence against her choirmaster abuser’, Daily Mirror, 9/2/13; Nafeesa Shan, ‘Choir perv’s victim kills herself after court ordeal: Fury over sex case trauma’, The Sun, 9/2/13l see also the Attorney General’s written answers to questions from Emily Thornberry MP on 27/2/13 and 1/3/13); the Labour MP for Stockport, Ann Coffey, backed by Childline founder Esther Rantzen, would later initiate a parliamentary debate on whether specialist courts were needed for sex abuse victims (Jennifer Williams, ‘Coffey’s Commons fight for sex abuse victims’, Manchester Evening News, 18/3/13; the House of Commons debate on 18/3/13; and ‘MP’s fight to protect abuse victims’, Manchester Evening News, 20/3/13). A string of articles portrayed a rather idealised view of Andrade, though some did mention her being given up for adoption as a baby, the death of her adoptive father soon before she auditioned for Chetham’s, her previous history of suicide attempts (dating right back to her time after first arriving at Manchester) and self-harm, and the fact that her abuse at the hands of her uncle had continued right up until her wedding (to Indian violinist Levine Andrade) in 1988 (see various previously mentioned articles, and Helen Pidd, ‘Michael Brewer’s victim told how much-loved teacher became abuser’ and ‘Frances Andrade: ‘a force of creativity”, The Guardian, 8/2/13′ ; Russell Jenkins and Lucy Bannerman, ‘Choirmaster’s victim wanted to put past behind her’, The Times, 9/2/13; Britten and Gardham, ‘Frances Andrade ‘traumatised”; Britten and Gardham, ‘Destroyed by reliving abuse she hid for 30 years’; Peter Walker, ‘Frances Andrade killed herself after being accused of lying, says husband’, The Guardian, 10/2/13; David Barrett, ‘Police argue over who told abuse victim: don’t get help’, The Telegraph, 10/2/13; Martin Evans, ‘Abuse victim Frances Andrade was told not to seek therapy, family claim’, The Telegraph, 10/2/13; Rachel Dale, ‘Sex victim death not our fault, says CPS’, The Sun, 10/2/13; David Leppard, ‘Violinist’s suicide: judge attacked’, The Sunday Times, 10/2/13; Jane Merrick and Brian Brady, ‘Chris Grayling’s rape comments raise fury after abuse victim’s suicide’, The Independent, 10/2/13; Peter Dominiczak, ‘Death of Frances Andrade will put other victims off coming forward, says Home Secretary’, The Telegraph, 11/2/13; Tom Rawsteon, ‘Rape trial ordeal drove my wonderful mother to six suicide attempts’, Daily Mail, 11/2/13; Chris Riches, ”Sacrifice’ of suicide wife in sex case trial’, The Express, 11/2/13; Martin Evans, ‘Police review after sex abuse victim’s suicide’, The Telegraph, 11/2/13; Nick Britten and Peter Dominiczak, ‘Violinist’s suicide could stop abuse victims coming forward, warns May’, The Telegraph, 12/2/13; Jonathan Brown, ‘Defence lawyers exploit the weakness of sex abuse victims, says police chief Sir Peter Fahy’, The Independent, 12/2/13. In a few other places some wider information was given about Brewer, mentioning how he had been nicknamed ‘Brewer the Screwer’, had likely groomed Andrade from the time she first entered the school, and was known by others to have asked girls in class to massage his shoulders and the like (Tom Henderson and James Tozer, ‘Choirmaster who abused girls and the twisted wife who joined in’, Daily Mail, 9/2/13).

The headteacher of Chetham’s, Claire Moreland, made a statement outside court to saying:

What we have learned during the course of the last four weeks has shocked us to the core. The passage of time between the offences and now does not lessen this shock.

“Mr Brewer has been found to have committed the most appalling acts which took place during his time at the school and he breached the trust placed in him by the school, its staff and, most importantly, the students.

“On behalf of the current school staff, I wish to express my profound and sincere apology and regret. And most of all I wish to express the sorrow and sympathy we feel for the family of our former student who died under such tragic circumstances and had to endure so much. (Cited in Pidd, ‘Michael Brewer’s victim told how much-loved teacher became abuser’. See also ‘Hurt caused by choirmaster Michael Brewer ‘must never be forgotten’, The Telegraph, 8/2/13)

Further ire was directed at the school’s having allowed Brewer to resign from his post on health grounds and thus remain working with children (Russell Jenkins, ‘Abuser quit on ‘health grounds”, The Times, 9/2/13). The NYCGB (who in an early statement went so far as to say ‘we hope that Mike Brewer’s legacies for young singers – including vocal excellence, outstanding performance opportunities, and exploring a vast repertoire – will remain core to NYCGB’s work’ (see Pilling and Clark, ‘CPS defends itself over abuse case’)) would in due course issue a statement denying all knowledge of any problems with Brewer prior to his being charged (without clarifying whether they knew of the circumstances of Brewer’s resignation from Chetham’s), and assuring readers of their operation of strict child protection policies (National Youth Choir of Great Britain, ‘News: Thu, Feb 14th 2013: Important Statement’; see also Norman Lebrecht, ‘National Youth Choirs of GB on its convicted ex-director’, Slipped Disc,. Further criticisms were aimed at NYCGB and their chairman, Professor Christopher Higgins, for allowing Brewer to continue to work with the choir during the eight-month period between his arrest and being charged, even following a concern being raised by a child protection official from Durham County Council back in October 2011; trustee Judy Grahame, chief executive of M&C Saatchi Arts, said that ‘The chairman seemed to be more concerned about protecting Mike Brewer than looking after the interests of the children, and I thought that was wrong’ (Lucy Bannerman and Richard Morrison, ‘Paedophile choirmaster Michael Brewer worked with children after his arrest’, The Times, 15/2/13; Nick McCarthy, ‘Abuser left in choir job after arrest’, Birmingham Mail, 15/2/13; Mark Tallentire, ‘Accused abuser kept in choir role’, The Northern Echo, 16/2/13).

The fruits of Pidd and Ibbotson’s investigations for The Guardian were printed over the course of the following week, creating a storm of negative publicity for Chetham’s and also the Royal Northern College of Music. First up was a story published on the day of the verdict concerning Layfield (Helen Pidd and Philippa Ibbotson, ‘Claims of sexual misconduct against second former Chetham teacher’, The Guardian, 8/2/13; see also Nick Britten and Peter Dominiczak, ‘Violinist’s suicide could stop abuse victims coming forward, warns May’, The Telegraph, 12/2/13), and a redacted version of the correspondence between Martin Roscoe and Edward Gregson concerning Layfield’s appointment (and Roscoe’s subsequent resignation) from 2002 (‘Correspondence over appointment of Malcolm Layfield at Royal Northern College of Music’, The Guardian, 8/2/13). Roscoe was widely perceived in the music world as having been vindicated and courageous for taking his stand (at considerable personal and emotional cost to himself, as he would reveal in interview) (see Charlotte Higgins, ‘After Michael Brewer: the RNCM teacher’s story’, The Guardian, 13/2/13), whilst four days later, Layfield would quit the RNCM board (Helen Pidd, ‘Ex-Chetham’s teacher quits RNCM board amid claims of sexual misconduct’, The Guardian, 12/2/13), and a week later than that would resign as Head of Strings at the college (Helen Pidd, ‘Teacher quits music college amid sex allegations’, The Guardian, 19/2/13). [This paragraph has been especially heavily redacted because at the time of writing, Layfield has been charged with one count of rape and is awaiting trial]

Next up was a series of horrifying accounts, featuring on the front page and in a large spread of the paper, bringing home to many the nature of the abuse of female students by Chris Ling, for which ten of his former students agreed to speak to the paper about their experiences, some when as young as 14. They spoke of his grooming and manipulation techniques, repeated groping, sexual touching under the pretext of a massage, requests for oral sex, use of systems of rewards and punishments (involving indecent spanking), requests for pupils to play naked in lessons and various else. One student spoke of how she took her complaints to headmaster John Vallins but nothing came of them (Helen Pidd and Philippa Ibbotson, ‘Pupils accuse third teacher of abuse at top music school’; ‘A musical hothouse where ‘Ling’s strings’ say they fell prey to abuse’; ‘Chetham’s school of music: former pupils speak out’, The Guardian, 10/2/13). Other victims contacted Pidd soon afterwards and there were further accounts of his abuse, his evocation of the figures of Myra Hindley and Ian Brady during lessons, or asking students to imagine being injected with a syringe of the HIV virus if they made a mistake, whilst one who used to clean Ling’s house at Reading at age 15 also detailed sexual assault involving nudity, blindfolding and spanking (Helen Pidd and Philippa Ibbotson, ‘Chetham’s school of music: further abuse allegations emerge’, The Guardian, 12/2/13; Helen Pidd ‘New claims emerge of sexual abuse at Chetham’s music school’, The Guardian, 13/2/13).

Pidd and Ibbotson also published accounts of five students of Ryszard Bakst from both Chetham’s and the RNCM, detailing how he would sexually assault them (sometimes as young as 13) on the sofa of his house, force their hands down his crotch until he became aroused, grope their breasts and place his hand up their skirts, sometimes disappearing in the middle of a lesson to masturbate. Bakst’s status at the school was made clear; it was said that ‘his general demeanour was quite intimidating’ and he exerted a ‘Svengali-like influence on many of his pupils’, how much of a privilege it was said to be to study with him, and how one pupil who confided in another teacher was told that this complaint should not be taken further as it would ruin some of his male students’ careers (Pidd and Ibbotson, ‘Chetham’s school of music: further abuse allegations emerge’).

Then, just six days after the verdict, many were further shocked by the news of the arrest of prominent flagship violin teacher Wen Zhou Li (who had earlier taught for a long period at the Menuhin School) on charges of rape (Helen Pidd, ‘Chetham’s music school violin teacher arrested on suspicion of rape’, The Guardian, 14/2/13). At the time of writing, Li has not yet been charged . Other journalists started to look more deeply into the culture of cover-up which had allowed Brewer’s abuse of Andrade to continue, asking various ex-students (including myself) about their knowledge of events at the time, and considering more deeply whether such abuse was an especial danger in the environment provided by a music school (see Amy Glendinning, ‘Chetham’s child sex abuse investigation widens’, Manchester Evening News, 14/2/13; Neil Tweedie, Nick Britten and Joe Shute, ‘Frances Andrade: A culture of abuse, denial and cover-up’, The Telegraph, 15/2/13; Richard Morrison, ‘The very act of teaching music made Chetham’s school ripe for fear and exploitation, say two famous alumni’, The Times, 20/2/13).

Immediately after the verdict, former Chetham’s pupils, many of who had been following the trial avidly, organised into new communities on social media to discuss their often conflicted responses to the conviction of Brewer, who had played such a prominent part in most of their schooling (as director of music, aural teacher, conductor of both orchestras and choirs at the school, and writer of reports on every single student’s progress). Divides quickly emerged: some were in denial about the verdict, others became angry about the aftermath with the new revelations about the school, many wanted to separate Brewer from anything else to do with the school, especially as it existed at present, whilst another equally large community was angered by the whole phenomenon, and began avidly discussing many other incidences of molestation, groping or other abuse, as well as a good deal of wider neglect and psychological abuse; these would remain topics of conversation for a good while. Some expressed the view that now was the time for former pupils to get behind the school at its time of need (a refrain which would be echoed soon afterwards by the management and their representatives), and for a while in amongst a 1970s and 1980s alumni community there grew bitterness towards mounting press coverage and intense hostility towards some of those (including myself) who clearly had some involvement with this. It became clear that many former pupils’ own sense of identity and reputations were quite intimately tied up with the reputation of the school, and any suggestion that the institution itself shared some responsibility were strongly rejected by that reason. Other hostility was directed towards Williams, blamed for forcing the court case in the first place (There are some hints of this perspective in Russell Jenkins and Lucy Bannerman, ‘Choirmaster’s victim wanted to put past behind her’, The Times, 9/2/13. However, Jenkins and Bannerman do quote Oliver Andrade, saying of Fran that ‘Sticking to her morals she knew she must do what was right, to tell the facts as they were and leave it to the law to decide, even as she was only just beginning to see that Brewer’s actions were indeed abuse’).

The pianist Peter Donohoe, a student at Chetham’s and the RNCM in the late 1960s and early 1970s, wrote a long blog post soon after the trial expressing his doubts about the institutions, and admiration for Roscoe in having stood up against Layfield, as well as expressing support for the ongoing petition (see below) (Peter Donohoe, ‘Sexual Abuse at Chethams and RNCM’, published early 2013). Questions were asked about Hullah (despite his having been responsible for the dismissals of Brewer, Layfield and Bakst), who went on to become a bishop (Norman Lebrecht, ‘Chetham’s head during sex abuse years became a bishop… and still heads a school’, Slipped Disc, 11/2/13).

Great Manchester Police made clear that they were now investigating the new allegations, and at first mentioned nine ‘key’ suspects (Helen Pidd, ‘Music schools sex abuse inquiry focuses on nine key suspects’, The Guardian, 18/2/13). This investigation (still ongoing) would come to be known as Operation Kiso. Meanwhile, in the light of continued negative press coverage, Claire Moreland wrote to all Chetham’s parents on February 18th to say the following:

As Half Term approaches, I am sure that you will be talking with your sons and daughters about the difficult events of the last few weeks and the ensuing media attention. With that in mind I would like to let you know that we have invited Manchester City Council Children’s Services into the School after Half Term to carry out a collaborative review with us of our Safeguarding Policy and Procedures. We welcome this visit which will take place during the week beginning 4 March. It is an opportunity for the School to demonstrate that we have robust Policies and Procedures in place which are applied routinely and rigorously.

We are confident that students are well protected. This has been borne out by inspections carried out by various government bodies in recent years. As you are aware, our procedures are also annually reviewed and approved by the Governing Body and have been regularly and independently reviewed by Ofsted and the Independent Schools Inspectorate.

Once the Police investigation into historical allegations has concluded we will of course be instigating an independent review of past events. I thank you for your continuing warm support and your understanding at this difficult time. Please do not hesitate to give me or any member of the pastoral team a call with any concerns, and in the meantime I wish you all a peaceful and happy Half Term break with your families. (Claire Moreland to Chetham’s Parents and Carers, 18/2/13, forwarded to the author)

The freelance critic Norman Lebrecht, who had earlier printed Nigel Kennedy’s revelations about the Menuhin School in 2003 and also coverage of the resignation of Peter Crook at the Purcell School in 2011, gave intense coverage to the Brewer trial and the fall-out from the verdict on his blog Slipped Disc, in various entries which provoked a flurry of responses. He invited the cellist Michal Kaznowski to write about sexual and psychological abuse from the late cellist Maurice Gendron in the late 60s and 70s at the Menuhin School, which led to other commentators (using pseudonyms, as was common on this blog) also relating their own unhappy experiences of the place (Norman Lebrecht, ‘It wasn’t just Chetham’s. Abuse was going on at Yehudi Menuhin School and elsewhere’, Slipped Disc, 10/2/13). Another article related allegations pointing to all of the three principal music colleges in London (the RCM, RAM, GSMD) (Norman Lebrecht, ‘Sex abuse in music schools: three fingers point to London’, Slipped Disc, 12/2/13), relating to cases which I and others working with me would discover more about in due course.

Together with two other former Chetham’s students, both pianists (and Bakst students), Paul Lewis and Tim Horton, a petition was launched in mid-February, for publication in The Guardian and then submission to the heads of the music schools and colleges, and all appropriate ministers and their shadow counterparts. The text was as follows:

In recent weeks, the ongoing allegations of historical sexual abuse at Chetham’s School of Music have put many aspects of music education under intense public scrutiny. Following the conviction of the former director of music, Michael Brewer, the tragic death of Frances Andrade, and extensive testimonies in the press of other abuse, it is clear that there should now be a full independent inquiry into the alleged sexual and psychological abuse by Chetham’s staff since the establishment of the institution as a music school in 1969. Such an inquiry would ideally extend to other institutions as well, some of which have also been the subject of allegations of abuse.

Recent press reports have suggested that during this time many students complained to senior members of staff about the sexually abusive behaviour of a number of Chetham’s teachers, but that no satisfactory action was taken. While it is of primary concern that those who stand accused should be investigated as soon as possible, if these allegations are shown to be correct it will be important to understand the wider implications of a school culture which facilitated such abuses of trust, and afforded alleged offenders long-term protection. For this reason, we ask senior members of staff from that time to account for what appears to be the severe failure of the school system to protect its pupils from those who exploited their positions of power. The prevalence of sexual abuse which appears to have continued unhindered over many years suggests an alarming lack of responsibility and competence in the management of a school which had, above all, a duty to protect the welfare of its students and to nurture the artistic potential of every pupil. That Chetham’s appears to have failed in this respect, and with such devastating consequences for the personal and professional lives of the alleged victims, now requires some considerable explanation from those who held senior positions of authority. (see Ian Pace, ‘Re-opened until May 31st, 2013 – Petition for an Inquiry into Abuse in Specialist Music Education’, Desiring Progress, 9/5/13, and the earlier entries (all replete with comments, some giving detailed information on abuse) from 16/2/13 and 19/2/13)

By February 19th, when it was published in The Guardian (Pidd, ‘Teacher quits music college amid sex allegations’, and ‘Call for inquiry into abuse allegations’, The Guardian, 19/2/13), the petition had gained around 550 signatories including over 200 former Chetham’s students; by the 24th, when it was closed for the first time, there were over 1000 signatories including over 300 from Chetham’s (including a number of former teachers), and various luminaries from the musical world (for my own reflections on the petition, see ‘Q&A: Ian Pace’, Classical Music Magazine).

During the short period when the signatures were being compiled, and also for a while afterwards, I myself received a huge amount of private correspondence, with many giving sometimes graphic (and deeply upsetting) details of much more widespread abuse spanning all five music schools and all the four major music colleges (as well as a few relating to other colleges, and to several choir schools). By this point I was now in possession of a huge amount of highly sensitive information which – if even only half of it were definitely true – pointed to there being a vast network of abuse in musical education over a long period.

For obvious reasons of confidentiality, I cannot divulge anything more than the overall gist of this information here. Suffice to say that, with respect to Chetham’s, further allegations relating to a very wide range of teachers (some of them familiar to me from my time there, but I was unaware of their being abusers), and to the situation also of students being sent away in the 1970s and 1980s to live with other people, including one especially alarming case involving kidnapping. I became aware of a very large number of alleged victims of Chris Ling, and of the fact that there might be as many as 50 (or even more) of Bakst over a period of several decades. Some claimed that when they went forward to the authorities or (in the case of Ling) to the police, they were ignored, or ostracised by teachers, houseparents and fellow pupils.

Over and above this, there were legions of stories emerging of physical and psychological abuse (some of which were unfortunately familiar): 11-year olds being violently struck over the head with large objects, blunt objects being thrown at pupils across the class, another student punched in the face by a 6’4″ teacher in front of a whole class, girls being pushed down to squash their breasts against desks by male teachers, students being publicly humiliated in front of others in wantonly cruel fashion, teachers casually smacking students on their behinds (in 2012!), liberal and enthusiastic use of corporal punishment, widespread bullying encouraged by teachers. Many stories came forward of long-term emotional instability and severe depression (and several successful suicides) from former pupils; whilst while at the school there were a great many serious eating disorders (including a hunger strike on the part of some girls which went unnoticed), much self-harm, and in the late 1990s an epidemic of suicide attempts; many were expelled afterwards. Various teachers would take out their own emotional insecurities on their instrumental pupils, one teacher regularly throwing her bags at them in a violent rage in lessons. Another would insist that she only needed 3 or 4 hours sleep per night and would insist that her teenage boys should make do with the same, to save more time for practice; one followed her instructions leading to a nervous breakdown.

The defenders of Chetham’s were now starting to become more public, and some of the community of parents and current pupils were enlisted in support of the school. Football correspondent for The Independent Ian Herbert, whose 12-year old son George was a pupil at the school, learning trumpet, piano and composition, wrote a spirited defence of the current school, standing up for head teacher Claire Moreland and director of music Stephen Threlfall, citing the conductor Paul Mann (who had interrupted applause at a concert he had recently given with the Chetham’s Symphony Orchestra in London to say ‘In case you’ve been wondering, this is what the real Chet’s is about’) on how the current child protection checks ‘bear out a world unrecognisable from the Brewer days’, and saying how current pupils ‘don’t recognise this picture which has been presented of their school’ (Ian Herbert, ‘The two sides of Chetham’s: what the press reports – and what the parents see’, The Independent, 1/3/13). Two leaders of one alumni group on social media posted an appeal for people to write to Judge Rudland to urge a lenient sentence for Michael Brewer (but were met with contempt by many others).

With the information of which I was in possession (further details below), I was concerned to find a way of making more of it public (subject of course to the consent of those who had entrusted me with it) in order to strengthen the case for an inquiry. I had already sent my petition to the appropriate people, but in time received non-descript responses from the heads of the specialist music schools (in the case of Chetham’s, only the bursar, not the head, replied), whilst after a while the Department for Education made it clear that they had currently no plans for an inquiry. A similar response was received by various others who had lobbied their MPs to write to the DfE. After being contacted by Channel 4 News, and receiving various assurances in terms of victim support and legal guarantees, as well as gauging that they were the news organisation most likely to treat this responsibly whilst having the potential to communicate to a wide audience, I worked for a while with a group of others to help both GMP with general information relating to Chetham’s, and also help Channel 4 News with a major feature looking at abusive behaviour in each of the major specialist music schools.

Whilst this was going on behind the scenes, for several weeks media coverage was quieter, until the sentencing of the Brewers on March 26th – Michael Brewer received a sentence of six years whilst Kay Brewer was sentenced to 21 months (Helen Pidd, ‘Chetham’s music teacher Michael Brewer jailed for sexually abusing pupil’, The Guardian, 26/3/13; Russell Jenkins, ”Predatory’ choirmaster Michael Brewer and wife jailed’, The Times, 26/3/13; Nick Britten, ‘Jailed: predatory sex abuser who drove victim to her death’, The Telegraph, 27/3/13; Anthony Bond, ‘Paedophile choirmaster and wife are jailed for sexually abusing former pupil who was found dead after giving evidence against him’, Daily Mail, 26/3/13; James Tozer, ‘Free in three years, abusive choirmaster whose victim killed herself’, Daily Mail, 27/3/13; Chris Riches, ‘Jailed, paedophile choirmaster and wife whose victim committed suicide’, The Express, 27/3/13; Nafeesa Shan, ‘Choir perv jailed: Suicide case paedo’s 6 yrs’, The Sun, 27/3/13). Brewer was said by Kate Blackwell to ‘extend his sorrow for Mrs Andrade’s death’, but he nonetheless ‘continues to deny any offending towards her’ . The judge’s verdict during sentencing was especially telling in terms of the responses of supporters of Brewer (a significant number of whom, including many prominent figures in the music and Manchester business communities, had apparently written to appeal to him for a shorter sentence):

14. It is surprising that all those who have spoken so well of you at your trial, when called by you in your defence, did so, it seems, in the full knowledge of your relationship with M. It may well be that they were not aware of the detail of the way in which you exploited her but they were apparently nevertheless more than happy to overlook one of the most shocking aspects of this case.

15. Indeed, perhaps one of the few positive features to have emerged from this case is the resulting close scrutiny of the seemingly wider acceptance of this type of behaviour amongst those who should know better. (‘His Honour Judge Martin Rudland, Manchester Crown Court, R –V- Michael Brewer and Hillary Kaye Brewer, 26 March 2013, Sentencing Remarks’; this was noted in Pilling, ‘Chetham school choirmaster Michael Brewer jailed for six years’; Pidd, ‘Chetham’s music teacher Michael Brewer jailed’ and Bond ‘Paedophile choirmaster and wife are jailed’)

This was accompanied by a new stream of broadcast reports, in several of which were featured anonymous accounts by former Chetham’s students of the abuse they suffered, and also how the authorities took no notice, and some talking about how abuse claims spread beyond Manchester (‘Sex abuse claims spread beyond Manchester music school’, broadcast on ITV, 26/3/13; ‘Chetham’s choirmaster Michael Brewer jailed for sexual abuse’, broadcast on BBC, 26/3/13 (text only); ‘Chetham’s teacher Michael Brewer jailed for sexual abuse’, broadcast on Channel 4, 26/3/13). Oliver Andrade also gave a much-admired TV interview, testifying to his mother’s bravery, arguing that the judge was fair, and refusing to countenance criticism of Kate Blackwell (‘Son speaks of late mum’s legacy after her abuser is jailed’, broadcast on ITV, 27/3/13; see also Mark Blunden, ‘Son of sex abuse victim backs defence lawyer’, The Evening Standard, 27/3/13).

Then in early April the reports by the Independent Schools Inspectorate and Manchester City Council into Chetham’s were made public, and it became clear that the school had been found severely wanting. The ISI report included the following:

On Child protection policy generally:
Discussions with staff indicated that not all are clear about the process to be followed when concerns are reported or allegations made, and the procedures specified by the school are not always implemented in practice – for example, the safeguarding concerns form is not always completed and informal discussions are held instead.

Parents’ views – in response to survey carried out recently by the school about music experiences provided by school and progress made by children in music:
Approximately one-third of parents responded, the majority positively, but a very small minority of parents indicated their dissatisfaction with the information they are given about their child’s progress in instrumental tuition, a factor mentioned at the time of the previous ISI inspection. Comments from parents in response to the ISI questionnaire confirmed that this remains an issue.
On Child Inspection regulatory requirements:

At the time of the inspection visit, the school’s child protection policy was found to cover most of the requirements which are the duties of proprietors of independent schools. However, the school’s written policy is not suitably comprehensive and has not been properly implemented. (ISI report downloadable here)

The Manchester City Council report included the following:

Section 4.1 (b) (viii)
No evidence was provided of any formal, minuted governing body/school committee meetings called so that leaders and governors could reflect on the implications of recent allegations in connection with the school, carry out appropriate scrutiny, audit and self evaluation and consider the need to conduct a comprehensive review of current safeguarding policies, procedures and practice;

(ix)
There was no evidence to confirm that governors had sought assurances about current safeguarding arrangements, given the context of recent allegations, resulting in convictions and arrests of individuals connected with the school. A current employee was arrested on 14th February 2013 in relation to an historic allegation, is presently suspended and is the subject of
ongoing police investigation.

Section 4.1(h)
There are inconsistencies in relation to the CPO, designated governor for safeguarding and the head of academic music’s understanding of school policy and procedures for teaching at the home of a tutor. This ranges from an understanding that pupils ‘wouldn’t ever have home tuition’, to it is not encouraged or sanctioned by the school and would only be agreed and arranged by parents, to if there was an exceptional circumstance that required teaching at the home of a tutor, there would be a risk assessment completed and parental consent sought. No reference is made to home tuition in the staff, pupil or parents handbooks. During interviews with pupils some pupils stated that home tuition regularly takes place.

Section 5.1(i)
It was the view of some pupils however, that there was little point in raising issues or concerns because they would not be listened to or acted upon. This was borne out in the pupils’ response to the ISI questionnaire. 36% of pupils responded negatively to the statement: ‘the school asks for my opinions and responds to them’, when a negative response of more than 20% is seen as significant by the ISI.

Section 5.1(d)
The named governor for safeguarding has been identified as the person other than a parent, outside the boarding and teaching staff of the school, who pupils can talk to if they feel the need. No reference is made of this in the pupil or parent handbooks. When pupils were asked about who, other than a parent/guardian they could turn to, some pupils cited the named governor for safeguarding, others did not know about such a person and one pupil referred to them as ‘some random person’ that they were told to contact if they needed to and added that they were told about this person in a recent assembly.

Section 6.1
The Local Authority saw little evidence that the Governing body/school committee have sufficiently held the senior leaders of the school to account regarding providing assurances that the current arrangements for safeguarding are actually being implemented, applied robustly, monitored appropriately or evaluated effectively. In the context of recent convictions, allegations and ongoing police investigations, where extra assurances would be expected, this is a cause for concern.

6.2 Arrangements are present to promote a culture and climate of effective safeguarding at Chetham’s School of Music but the arrangements are not routinely and reliably implemented, robustly applied, monitored or evaluated by the senior leadership team, governors and Feoffees. This demonstrates inadequate oversight of safeguarding by the proprietors and therefore the Local Authority is not confident about the overall effectiveness of the leadership and governance of safeguarding arrangements in the school.

6.3 The Feoffees as proprietors of the school have not effectively discharged their duties with respect to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of pupils. They have not ensured that the Headteacher has fulfilled her duties for the effective implementation of the school’s policies and procedures in regard to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of pupils.

6.4 It is our view that in similar circumstances, in a state-maintained school setting, the nature of these findings, including the current context referred to in 6.1 above, would lead us to invite the chair of governors or trustees to a formal review meeting to discuss the capacity for governance and senior leadership to address the failings identified. (full report accessible here)

Chetham’s responded on their website initially as follows:

Unfortunately we believe the time allowed for the Review was insufficient. We have made detailed written representations and submitted further documentation to both MCS and the ISI, seeking meetings with both organisations to discuss these points in detail. There is enormous interest in the School at the current time and it is imperative that Chetham’s, and all students, staff and parents associated with it, are treated and represented accurately.

[…]

In addition to further dialogue with the ISI and MCS, we will be seeking a meeting with the Department for Education to discuss the Review’s findings and share a detailed action plan to demonstrate how we are remedying the issues highlighted. (some of this statement is reported in Helen Pidd, ‘Music school at heart of abuse scandal failed to safeguard pupils, reports find’, The Guardian, 3/4/13; all of the above above is published on Ian Pace, ‘Publication of Reports into Chetham’s by ISI and MCC: Senior Management and Governors should consider their position’, Desiring Progress, 3/4/13. See also this later statement from Chetham’s from 8/5/13)

The response of the DfE was as follows:

Schools have a legal and moral duty to protect children in their care. It is clear from the Independent Schools Inspectorate and Manchester City Council’s reports of their joint visit that the standard of care at Chethams school must be improved.

“Today (Tuesday) under section 165(3) of the Education Act 2002, we have served a notice requiring the school to produce an action plan setting out what it will do to meet the regulatory standards. The law requires the school to produce an action plan to set out how it will address the deficiencies the ISI inspection identified.

“Chethams now has until May to produce the action plan — if the plan is inadequate the Education Secretary has powers to remove the school from the register of independent schools.” (Statement forwarded to the author by Ciaran Jenkins of Channel 4 News)

An increasing campaign was mounted by Chetham’s parents and pupils on the blog of Norman Lebrecht to refute the various claims and defend the school, in which a small number of deeply unhappy parents responded to a chorus of others (see Norman Lebrecht, ‘Manchester Council condemns Chetham’s for failure to address ‘recent allegations’, Slipped Disc, 3/4/13; ; ‘The skies just darkened over Chetham’s, Slipped Disc, 3/4/13). Key to the arguments posited (which had begun to emerge from the time of the Guardian reports in February) was the notion that it was wrong for these ‘historic’ allegations to be dragged up because of the hurt they caused current pupils. Text forwarded to Lebrecht via one parent revealed an organised campaign, with the apparent blessing of the head girl and Deputy Head of the School responsible for pastoral care (Norman Lebrecht, ‘Chet’s kids organize blog mob’, Slipped Disc, 5/4/13). At a meeting with parents at the beginning of term, Sunday April 14th, Claire Moreland was questioned by a few (though the majority appear to have been supportive) and was forced to reveal that current teachers were being investigated by GMP, giving a figure of ‘less than five’ (Norman Lebrecht, ‘How many teachers are being investigated at troubled music school?’, Slipped Disc, 17/4/13).

Channel 4 News continued to work on their report, which was broadcast on May 7th. The major revelation here, for the purposes of which the Channel 4 team had spoken to multiple pupils from who studied at the Yehudi Menuhin School in the 1960s and 1970s, was about the first director of music and co-founder of the school, Belgian pianist Marcel Gazelle, revealed as a serial abuser of girls as young as 10 in their beds (the broadcast was very careful in terms of what could be said both for legal reasons and because of the watershed, but many from the school at the time privately commented that the scale of Gazelle’s activities, allegedly involving multiple rape of older girls as well, was not always clear). For this broadcast, Nigel Kennedy was tracked down and persuaded to take on the record about Gazelle, revealing that he was the figure to whom he had referred in interview with Lebrecht back in 2003. The former student Irita Kutchmy chose to speak on the record about her own abuse at the hands of Gazelle, lending the broadcast, which alleged that abuse had gone on at all five specialist music schools, a vivid immediacy (Ciaran Jenkins, ‘Exclusive: Sex scandal implicates all five UK music schools’, Channel 4 News, 7/5/13). I immediately published on my blog a long article on Gazelle and the early culture of the Menuhin School, drawing upon accounts by various former students to paint a bleak picture of sexual, physical and emotional abuse at all levels, which brought Gazelle’s wife Jacqueline into the picture as well. This produced bitter responses from their son Didier, denying the allegations, protesting that ‘What was acceptable 50 years ago, is now considered as an offence’ and asking ‘Where is the limit between affection and sexual abuse?’ (Ian Pace, ‘Marcel Gazelle and the Culture of the Early Yehudi Menuhin School’, Desiring Progress, 7/5/13)

These new revelations was widely reported by all the leading UK newspapers (see in particular Victoria Ward, ‘Music school abuse scandal alleged to involve five top schools’, The Telegraph, 8/5/13, drawing upon some new information not broadcast by Channel 4), and also local and international press, and there followed a stream of further allegations, including Michal Kaznowski making more public his memories of Maurice Gendron (Paul Gallagher and Sanchez Manning, ‘Famous cellist was abusive monster, says former pupil’, The Independent, 9/5/13), the violinist Sacha Barlow speaking of inappropriate sexualised touching from the age of 12 by other members of staff at the school in the 1980s (Paul Gallagher, ‘Fresh abuse claims hit top music school’, The Independent, 12/5/13), and a former teacher at two (unspecified) specialist music schools, who had also spoken to Channel 4 News, talking of the ‘toxic’ atmosphere at the institutions, the attempted rape she suffered at the hands of one teacher, and the total lack of pastoral care at the places (Victoria Ward, ‘Teacher describes ‘toxic’ atmosphere at music schools’, The Telegraph, 9/5/13), also (for C4 News) urging against complacency that such abuse could not happen today. In this context, I elected to re-open the petition until the end of May (Alex Stevens, ‘Abuse in music schools: Petition reopens after new press coverage and MP’s support’, Classical Music Magazine, 10/5/13), and it has since received several hundred further signatories, and the backing of Lucy Powell, MP for Manchester Central.

On the day of broadcast of the Channel 4 News report, GMP made clear to Helen Pidd at The Guardian that as part of Operation Kiso they were investigating a whole 39 music school teachers from Manchester, of which 10 formed the nucleus of the operation, 12 were known through third-party referrals, another 12 were involved in activities which would probably not lead to criminal charges (in particular those who had sexual affairs with sixth-formers before 2003), and 5 were dead (Helen Pidd, ’39 Manchester music school teachers face inquiry’, The Guardian, 7/5/13). The very scale of the abuse being investigated was now becoming clearer to many.

By autumn 2013 four different teachers had been arrested – double-bassist Duncan McTier (who taught at the RNCM, but not at Chetham’s), violinist Wen Zhou Li (arrested in February 2013 right after the Brewer trial, at which time he was still teaching at Chetham’s), conductor Nicholas Smith (for offences against an underage girl in the 1970s) and violinist Malcolm Layfield (see above). McTier and Smith were charged in May 2014 (Helen Pidd, ‘Music teacher charged with indecent assaults’, The Guardian, 6/5/14; ‘World-renowned conductor charged with sexually assaulting Chetham pupil’, The Guardian, 27/5/14) and appeared in court in June (Helen Pidd, ‘Two musicians appear in court accused of sexually abusing music school pupils’, The Guardian, 13/6/14); McTier pleaded not guilty, whilst Smith did not enter a plea, but his solicitor indicated that he would be pleading not guilty. It was only at this stage that the Royal Academy of Music, where McTier now taught, decided to suspend him from his current job (not after his arrest the previous year). It was also revealed that McTier’s charges related not only to the RNCM but also to the Purcell School. It is anticipated that the trial will take place in the autumn of 2014. In January 2014, Greater Manchester Police indicated that they would seek the extradition of Chris Ling (Helen Pidd, ‘Police may seek extradition of US-based teacher accused of abusing pupils’, The Guardian, 6/1/14; James Tozer, ‘Violin teacher accused of sex abuse against female pupils at prestigious music college threatened with extradition proceedings so he can face trial in UK’, Daily Mail, 6/1/14); Layfield was charged with one count of rape in July 2014 (Helen Pidd, ‘Violin teacher charged with rape over alleged attack at Chetham’s school’, The Guardian, 29/7/14).

Further revelations came to light in 2014 about the knowledge of Moreland about earlier crimes after Paul Gallagher at the Independent was forwarded (by myself, with permission), letters from ex-pupils to Moreland (and also Gregson) in 2002 concerning the abuse they had suffered at the hands of Layfield. These heart-felt and distressing letters were met with stock replies of one or two sentences, just saying that current pastoral care systems meant this couldn’t happen again, rather than acknowledging any concern for the victims (Paul Gallagher, ‘Elite music school Chetham’s loses pupils in backlash at allegations of historic sexual abuse’, The Independent, 28/1/14). Moreland claimed in an self-justificatory interview published after the Independent article that she only heard about anything being wrong at the school in late 2011 (Richard Morrison, ‘Does Chetham’s have a future?’, The Times, 12/2/14).

By coincidence, the appearance of the Channel 4 News report come just before another devastating revelation following a sustained investigation by The Times and The Australian, concerning the late former Dean of Manchester Cathedral (1984-1993), Robert Waddington, about whom various former choristers had come forward to detail the sustained grooming, sexual abuse and sadistic beatings they had suffered at his hands, both in Manchester and when he had worked as a teacher in the 1960s and 1970s in Queensland (see Sean O’Neill, Michael McKenna and Amanda Gearing, ‘Archbishop in ‘cover-up’over abuse scandal’, ‘Accused cleric built reputation at small school in Australia’, and ‘Former Archbishop of York ‘covered up’ sex abuse scandal’, The Times, 10/5/13; Sean O’Neill, ‘Behind the story’ and ‘Victim of clergyman’s abuse was groomed as young chorister’, The Times, 10/5/13; Amanda Gearing, ‘Choirboy haunted by painful memories’, The Times, 10/5/13; Steve Doughty, ‘’I was the boyfriend of a monster’: Victim of paedophile priest speaks out as former Archbishop of York denies covering up child abuse claims’, Daily Mail, 10/5/13; Sean O’Neill,’ Church abuse suspect ‘investigated three times’, The Times, 11/5/13). Chetham’s School provides the majority of choristers for the cathedral and has other close links with the institution (I detailed this in Ian Pace, ‘Robert Waddington, Former Dean of Manchester Cathedral, and Chetham’s School of Music’, Desiring Progress, 12/5/13), and one former Chetham’s pupil soon came forward to detail his own abuse at the hands of Waddington (who was a close friend of headmaster John Vallins); it was also made public that Waddington had been on the board of governors for Chetham’s during his tenure as Dean, thus overlapping with the period of some of the worst abuse scandals alleged to have gone on at the school (Sean O’Neill, ‘Dean preyed on us during his reign at top music school, says former music pupil’ and ‘Dean was still preying on choirboys when Church ruled him too ill to be a risk’, The Times, 16/5/13; Paul Gallagher, ‘Former Dean accused of sex abuse was a governor at scandal-hit music school’, The Independent, 16/5/13; Michael McKenna and Amanda Gearing, ‘Accused cleric link to top music school abuse probe’, The Australian, 18/5/13). The coverage had focused on the culpability of the Church of England in covering up Waddington’s abuse; Chetham’s have not at the time of writing made any public comment about his involvement there other than to confirm his tenure as a governor.

A final complication was provided by the announcement of the abolition of the position of Director of Music at the Purcell School, thus rendering incumbent Quentin Poole redundant (see Norman Lebrecht, ‘Reports: Music School abolishes Head of Music post’, Slipped Disc, 12/5/13 and ‘Why Purcell is back in the headlights’, 14/5/13; both articles contain plentiful comments from individuals associated with the school). It is believed that this relates to a personal feud between the former Headmaster, Peter Crook and the Chairman of Governors. Crook fired the civil partner of Poole (about whom there have been suggestions of impropriety with pupils), and then after Crook’s own firing in 2011 (see earlier in this article), the Chairman fired Poole himself; but this all needs clarification in the face of many conflicting accounts.

Two further developments arising out of the Brewer trial have recently emerged. One is that the Cabinet Office’s honours forfeiture committee decided to strip Brewer of his OBE, awarded to him in late 1994; this forfeiture was announced on May 28th (Matt Chorley, ‘Exclusive: Paedophile choirmaster Michael Brewer whose victim killed herself is stripped of his OBE’, Daily Mail, 28/5/13; Christopher Hope, ‘Convicted child abuser Michael Brewer stripped of OBE by Queen’, The Telegraph, 28/5/13; Helen Pidd, ‘Former Chetham’s director Michael Brewer stripped of OBE’, The Guardian, 28/5/13). The following day, it was also announced that Brewer would appeal against the length of his sentence (‘Sex abuse choirmaster Michael Brewer in sentence appeal’, BBC News, 29/5/13; ‘Choirmaster jailed for sexually abusing pupil seeks to appeal against sentence’, The Guardian, 29/5/13; ‘Sex abuse Chethams teacher Michael Brewer in court bid to have sentence cut’, Manchester Evening News, 30/5/13).

A report was published on April 10th, 2014, by the Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board, into the suicide of Frances Andrade (Hilary Brown, ‘The death of Mrs A. A Serious Case Review’, Surrey County Council: Safeguarding Adults Board, see also the summary and press release). This report found much to be desired in the treatment of Andrade when she went to the police and during the proceedings, but also in particular had the following to say about musical education in general and the dangers therein:

Music schools, in common with other “hothousing” establishments, create pressures that may have a particularly damaging impact on young people who are vulnerable and/or without parental support. These settings are competitive, and feed into expectations already placed on the young person to be “special” and to succeed. The adults around them, who are often prominent performers in their own right, are invested with exceptional power and influence and are in a position of trust from which they exert considerable leverage over whether their pupils achieve success in their chosen fields. The music world is not alone in this regard, -similar pressures arise in elite sports academies, boarding schools, ballet schools, cathedral and choir schools, drama and performing arts courses, art schools and other areas of endeavour that create a backdrop for this very particular and potent form of grooming.

Chethams School provided an ideal environment for this kind of abuse to occur. The school seemed unaware of the risks of sexual abuse and it does not appear to have proactively promoted a child protection agenda. Boundaries were blurred and some staff seemed at times to act with impunity. When, Mrs A was sent, as a teenager, to live with MB and his family it was effectively a private fostering arrangement, put in place without any proper scrutiny or formal overview. The atmosphere of elite performance teaching created what one pupil described as a belief that you were “special”6 and it placed teachers in an exclusive and powerful position in relation to their protégés.

In response to this case another music teacher (MR), a man who had acted as a whistle-blower, published an article offering a window onto the culture in these circles at the time we are speaking of from which it can be seen that Mrs A was not alone in being at risk from abusive sexual relationships and unprofessional behaviour. MR later said,

Music lessons are one-to-one… So, if you’re determined to behave wrongly, there’s the opportunity: “It’s one of the easiest situations to abuse, I would have thought.”

He further discussed how music teaching in particular, takes place in a context of emotional intensity and that pupils’ crushes on staff are commonplace.

So this culture of sexualised behaviour between teachers and pupils that developed in the school at that time was, to some extent, known about and condoned. This culture may also have prevailed at the Royal Northern College of Music as there was considerable overlapping of staff, and this became the focus of contention specifically in relation to the appointment of ML to a senior post at the college. MR publicly confronted the principle of the college about the suitability of this appointment, given widespread allegations about ML’s sexual exploitation of young women students, at considerable cost to his career7. When he made his concerns public, he received many letters of support from students disclosing past abuses and concerns. Mrs A was one such pupil/student. When his whistle-blower’s warnings went unheeded, he recounted that

“Letters from pupils and professional musicians poured in, one was from [Mrs A] … She was a force to be reckoned with …”There was tremendous passion and anger.” Chethams therefore represented a very particular context in which it was possible for MB to target and groom Mrs A from a position of trust, power and influence. Although it seems to have been common knowledge that some teachers within the music network around Chethams and the Royal Northern Music School had sexual relationships with their pupils this was not formally addressed.

1. THIS REVIEW DID NOT HAVE A MANDATE TO COMMENT ON ISSUES OF CHILD PROTECTION BUT URGES CHILDREN’S SAFEGUARDING BOARDS AND THE INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS INSPECTORATE TO PAY ATTENTION TO ALL SCHOOLS ESPECIALLY, BUT NOT EXCLUSIVELY, BOARDING SCHOOLS INCLUDING THOSE CONCERNED WITH “SPECIAL” PUPILS OR THOSE THAT HAVE ELITE STATUS. THIS INCLUDES SO CALLED “FREE” SCHOOLS THAT EXIST TO SOME EXTENT OUTSIDE OF LOCAL NETWORKS. (Brown, ‘The death of Mrs A’, pp. 8-10)

These view resembles that presented in my own article for the Times Educational Supplement (Ian Pace, ‘The culture of music education lends itself to abuse’, TES, 8/5/13).

Since the events of the first half of 2013, there have been a range of other cases in the news of musicians and music teachers involved with abuse. In September 2013, another female music teacher was convicted of abusing children, this time boys. Jennifer Philp-Parsons, the then 45-year-old former head of music at a Devon school, was found guilty of sexually abusing two 16-year old boys (within one hour of each other) at her marital home, after having also pleaded guilty to three charges of sexual activity with a male aged 13 to 17 while in a position of trust, during May to June of that year; one report unfortunately described her as having ‘seduced’ (rather than abused) the boys (John Hall, ‘Teacher jailed for alcohol-fuelled sex sessions with two teenage pupils at her home’, The Independent, September 19th, 2013). Philp-Parsons was jailed for two years and six months, placed on the sex offenders register, and made the subject of a sexual offences prevention order. Graphic descriptions were provided of grooming the boys so as to become their favourite teacher, how she would ply the boys with alcohol and then sexually exploit them, as well as texts between her and the boys, though the defence tried to claim she was devoted to the boys, and blame this on the failure of her marriage (Richard Smith, ‘Jennifer Philp-Parsons: Teacher jailed for alcohol-fuelled sex sessions with two teenage pupils’, The Mirror, September 19th, 2013) whilst police also suggested there might be further victims, and urged them to come forward (Luke Salkeld, ‘Music Teacher, 45, had sex with two male 16-year old pupils in her home during drunken party while her husband slept upstairs’, Daily Mail, September 19th, 2013).

One of the most serious cases to come to light in recent times is historic, that of Alan Doggett, conductor and composer who was closely associated with Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice, and conducted the first performances of Joseph and the Amazing Technicolour Dreamcoat and Jesus Christ Superstar, about whom I have written at length (Ian Pace, ‘UPDATED: Alan Doggett, first conductor of Joseph and Jesus Christ Superstar, and the Paedophile Information Exchange’, Desiring Progress, 28/3/14). Over a dozen former pupils at Colet Court School in London (prep school for St Paul’s) have testified to Doggett’s abuse of boys aged as young as 10, sometimes in front of others (raping boys in dormitories), regular sexual touching of genitals of almost all boys, and even a form of child prostitution whereby they would be paid for allowing Doggett to use them. Doggett also taught at City of London School for Boys, St Mary’s School for Girls and Culford School, as well as running the London Boy Singers, a group of around 1000 boys drawn from schools all over London, before committing suicide in 1978 when facing molestation charges against a boy. There are many further allegations of abuse at some of these institutions. Since my own work and pioneering articles by Andrew Norfolk at The Times, a whole police investigation, Operation Winthorpe, has been set up to look at a mass of allegations at both Colet Court and St Paul’s (though I have been informed that Doggett is no longer part of the investigation) (Andrew Norfolk, ‘Teachers ‘abused boys at Osborne’s old school”, The Times, 25/3/14; ‘The teacher sat us on his lap until his face went very red’, The Times, 25/3/14; ‘Friends to stars had easy access to boys’, The Times, 25/3/14; ‘Boys punished for telling of abuse by teacher’, The Times, 28/3/14; ‘Police look into ‘decades of abuse’ at top school’, The Times, 9/4/14; ‘Abuse claims against 18 teachers by ex-pupils at top public school; St Paul’s co-operates with police inquiry led by head of Savile investigation’, The Times, 1/5/14; ‘Accused teacher kept on working for 24 years’, The Times, 1/5/14; ‘Teacher kept job for 16 years after pupils found sex tapes’, The Times, 20/5/14; ‘Colet Court and St Paul’s: a culture of child abuse’, The Times, 20/5/14. See also Benjamin Ross, ‘My Sadist Teachers at St Paul’s Prep School Betrayed a Generation’, Daily Mail, 1/6/14); at the time of writing, there have been seven arrests to date (‘Man arrested on suspicion of sexual assault at St Paul’s school’, The Guardian, 1/8/14).

In connection with investigations into Home Office funding for the Paedophile Information Exchange, the former civil servant Clifford Hindley, also a musicologist who wrote about the operas of Benjamin Britten, was named as the individual who had ensured such funding went ahead (Keir Mudie and Nick Dorman, ‘Huge sums of TAXPAYER’S cash ‘handed to vile child-sex pervert group’ by Home Office officials’, Sunday People, 1/3/14; see also David Hencke, ‘Revealed: The civil servant in the Home Office’s PIE funding inquiry and his academic articles on boy love’, 1/3/14). I wrote an extended piece analysing how deeply paedophile themes ran through many of Hindley’s writings on both Britten and Ancient Greece (Ian Pace, ‘Clifford Hindley: Pederasty and Scholarship’, Desiring Progress, 3/3/14).

The pianist and composer Ian Lake was revealed to have been a serial abuser of both boys (as young as 10) and girls at Watford School of Music and the Royal College of Music (RCM) (Paul Gallagher, ‘Decades of abuse by Royal College of Music piano teacher Ian Lake boosts demands for inquiry’, The Independent, 29/12/13). Lake had received a little-reported conviction for a sexual offence (of which details remain hazy) in 1995. One of his RCM victims spoke of telling the then principal, Michael Gough Matthews (Principal from 1985 to 1993, died in 2012), and whilst she was given a change of teacher, nothing else happened, so Lake was free to do the same to others. This type of process has been described by multiple victims at different institutions (including, for example, victims of Ryszard Bakst at the Royal Northern College of Music). Matthews’ successor as Principal, Dame Janet Ritterman, who was Principal at the RCM at the time when Lake was convicted (and is now Chancellor of Middlesex University), has been contacted for comment about what was known about Lake, but has declined to respond. Another late teacher at the RCM, Hervey Alan, was identified as having attempted a sexual assault on a student; again, when she complained, she received a change of teacher, but no further action was taken (Paul Gallagher, ‘Royal College of Music hit by more sex abuse allegations’, The Independent, 10/1/14). Furthermore, the victim (who was also a student of Lake’s on the piano) underwent a second attempted assault from a college porter, about which nothing was done after she complained. This woman has also detailed the ways in which not being prepared to respond to sexual advances in the professional world could hinder one’s career, a story which is all too familiar, and needs to be considered seriously alongside all the other dimensions to this issue. I have argued for a while that the granting of unchecked power to prominent musicians, administrators, and fixers almost invites the corruption of such power, and more, rather than less, state intervention is needed to ensure that proper employment practices are observed in a freelance world. Many musicians would hate this, for sure, and claim it represented an unwarranted intrusion by government into a field which should be driven by ‘purely musical’ concerns, but in my view the latter serve as a smokescreen for cynical and callous power games.

Robin Zebaida, pianist and examiner for the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music (ABRSM, responsible for the ‘grade’ exams that many young musicians take) since 1998, was convicted of sexually assaulting a 15-year old girl at the same time as he was seducing her mother; Zebaida received a two-year conditional discharge, was made to sign the sex offenders register for two years, and pay a £15 victim surcharge. The trial heard of romantic evenings with plentiful alcohol with Zebaida kissing the mother whilst groping the daughter; Zebaida would also claim he touched the daughter lightly on account of back problems she suffered following a car crash which had killed her father and brother (‘Concert pianist fondled girl of 15 while kissing her mother, court told’, The Telegraph, 21/11/13; Jennifer Smith, ‘Oxford-educated concert pianist ‘French kissed fan on his sofa while simultaneously fondling her 15-year-old daughter’, Daily Mail, 21/11/13; Hayley Dixon, ‘Concert pianist denies fondling girl, 15, while kissing mother’, The Telegraph, 26/11/13; Lucy Crossley, ‘Internationally renowned concert pianist found guilty of groping a 15-year-old while French-kissing her mother’, Daily Mail, 2/12/13; ‘Pianist guilty of sex assault on teenager’, The Telegraph, 3/12/13). I am not aware of the ABRSM having made any comment, but gather that Zebaida’s nature was well-known to others (private communications from an examiner).

In November 2013, Philip Evans, music teacher at the private King Edward’s School, Edgbaston, Birmingham (which dates from 1552 and was set up by Edward VI), pleaded guilty to seven sexual assaults, ten charges of making indecent photographs of children, and six counts of voyeurism; more than 400 000 indecent images were found on his computer (Teacher Admits Sexual Assault’, Press Association, 28/11/13). The trial found that Evans, who had also acted as an RAF ‘leader’ in the school’s Combined Cadet Force, had abused teenage boys whilst pretending to measure them for their school uniforms, and installed high tech equipment in changing rooms and showers to film pupils. Evans was sentenced in December to three years and eight months imprisonment (‘Paedophile music teacher jailed’, Evening Standard, 20/12/13; Jonny Greatrex, ‘Music teacher jailed for sexually abusing teenage pupils while pretending to measure them for uniforms’, Daily Mirror, 21/12/13; ‘Music teacher who rigged up hidden camera to film himself sexually abusing boys has been jailed’, Daily Mail, 20/12/13).

In February 2014, the early music conductor and former Guildhall School teacher Philip Pickett was charged with eight counts of indecent assault, three counts of rape, two counts of false imprisonment, one count of assault and one count of attempted rape (see the press release from City of London Police reproduced at Ian Pace, ‘Philip Pickett arrested on 15 charges, and interview with Clare Moreland in The Times’). Quite incredibly, Pickett’s trial was allowed to be postponed from October 2014 to January 2015 so that he could finish touring. Defence barrister Jonathan Barnard said at the Old Bailey ‘My client is a world famous musician and therefore earns his living on a job to job basis and has tours across the globe throughout the autumn – but the season slows down in the new year’. The Crown agreed on the grounds that ‘the allegations are at the latest 20 years old and the earliest, 40 years old’ (Ben Wilkinson, ‘Musician’s historic sex crimes trial put on hold’, Oxford Mail, 18/3/14).

Then in March 2014, an 18-year old oboist, Robin Brandon-Turner appeared in court on charges of making a girl perform oral sexual upon him when she was aged between 6 and 10 (and he was between 13 and 17); Brandon-Turner said he was just ‘experimenting’ at the time (‘Young musician Robin Brandon-Turner admits sex abuse’, BBC News, 17/3/14). He was given a two year probationary sentence in June 2014 at the High Court in Edinburgh, and ordered to attend a programme to address his behaviour (‘Sex abuse young musician Robin Brandon-Turner sentenced’, BBC News, 16/6/14).

On the basis of all the many published articles and reports, and also the wide range of information communicated to me privately, I have been able to surmise the following situation for the various schools and colleges, which has been presented to various politicians involved in abuse campaigning. It would not be appropriate to reproduce this here, but some other issues can be addressed.

Psychological and emotional abuse is believed by many to be rampant in the profession throughout education and elsewhere (Definitions are difficult in this context, as various studies have indicated. See in particular Kieran O’Hagan, Emotional and Psychological Abuse of Children (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1992), pp. 18-35, and O’Hagan, Identifying Emotional and Psychological Abuse: A Guide for Childcare Professionals (Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2006), pp. 27-40, in the latter of which several writers are cited on a preference for the term ‘psychological maltreatment’ (p. 30). The definitions examined here definitely encompass the types of abuse which can be identified within musical education. This subject is definitely in need of wider research in a musical context). To give just one of many examples of how this has been reported by many: a teacher looks to reduce a vulnerable student to tears at the beginning of most of their instrumental lessons, thus enabling them to take the student on their knee or otherwise physically comfort them. They aim to destroy the student’s fragile confidence and sense of identity and remake them in their own image. This can be a prelude to sexual abuse or simply a strategy for control and domination.


Why Focus Specifically on Musical Education?

Sexual and other abuse have been discovered – and in various cases the perpetrators dismissed, banned from working with children and/or faced criminal convictions – in many fields of life. However, there are reasons why its manifestation in musical education deserves special individual treatment. My own article, written in February 2013 and published in May in the Times Educational Supplement, on why those studying music might be particularly vulnerable to abuse, is included at the end of this article. A recurrent issue for many commentators has been that of one-to-one tuition and the power accorded to individual teachers to dominate students who are utterly at their behest (see Britten and Dominiczak, ‘Violinist’s suicide could stop abuse victims coming forward’; Tweedie, Britten and Schute, ‘Frances Andrade: A culture of abuse, denial and cover-up’; Jonathan West, ‘Sexual abuse at music schools’, 2/3/13; Pidd, Ibbotson and Carroll, ‘A musical hothouse in which ‘Ling’s strings’ say they fell prey to abuse’. Some rather crude sub-editing made an interview with RNCM principal Linda Merrick – Helen Pidd, ‘One-to-one music tuition ‘may be abolished”, The Guardian, 1/3/13 – characterise Merrick’s views in a simplistic fashion. Merrick merely argued that this mode of teaching might be looked at again, as I argue in ‘Q & A: Ian Pace’, Classical Music); this type of teaching is significantly more prevalent in musical education than elsewhere.

The classical music profession is highly competitive and often highly aggressive as many people jostle for a relatively small amount of available work. This fact is often mobilised in order to justify cruel treatment of young musicians, maintaining that they require such treatment in order to be ‘toughened up’ for the demands of a professional career. The effects upon those who do not succeed can and have been devastating.

Classical music depends upon a large degree of state money in order to function, yet there is little in the way of wider state intervention in the workings of the profession – because of the dangers especially in education but more widely in terms of abuse and maltreatment of adult musicians, I argue that the ‘hands-off’ approach of the Arts Council may no longer be most appropriate. When it is possible for some powerful musicians to build their own fiefdoms, and use the fact of their holding such power to dictate that others may have to sleep with them or artificially please them in other ways, there is immense potential for corruption. A state-subsidised world featuring individuals reigning over unchecked power must be reconsidered.

Whilst the UK conservatoires have their roots in the nineteenth century, and in particular the move towards a degree of professionalization of musical education in the last few decades of that century, when most of those schools were either founded or began to move towards their modern form, the five specialist music schools were all founded between 1962 and 1972, and so are a recent phenomenon. Whilst the first two of these – the Purcell School (previously the Central Tutorial School for Young Musicians) (founded 1962), and the Yehudi Menuhin School (founded 1963) – were essentially created ‘from scratch’ to provide a more intensive level of musical education from a young age, the remaining three – Chetham’s (founded as a music school in 1969), Wells (music school section founded 1970), and St Mary’s (founded as a music school in 1972) all had existing choir schools prior to taking on their specialist music form. Furthermore, both the Menuhin School and St Mary’s in particular (the latter of which was viewed by Menuhin as a sister school in Scotland to his own institution) drew inspiration from existing models of specialist music tuition as provided in the Soviet Union – during a time at the height of the Cold War, in which this country was dedicated to the production of soloists who would win international competitions (following the shock provided by the victory of American pianist Van Cliburn in the 1958 Tchaikovsky Competition in Moscow), in such a way that all other considerations were secondary . How these various aspects of the schools’ pedagogical history and roots affected their development – permitting widespread psychological abuse and much sexual abuse, the latter arguably an extension of the former – requires comprehensive and detailed scrutiny by experts. It is worth pointing out in this context the fact of a huge sexual abuse scandal affecting the Central Music School in Moscow (founded 1932, and in some ways the major model for future secondary specialist music education), in which pianist Anatoly Ryabov was accused of abusing 53 different girls, many of them aged 12 or 13, between 1987 and 2011. When the case came to court, the children and their mothers were blamed for over-ambition and destroying the school’s legendary reputation, and seducing a venerable teacher, whilst Ryabov was portrayed in the press as if fighting Putin’s regime, and much of the Moscow musical establishment swung behind him. All of the charges were thrown out and Ryabov found not guilty (information provided to me by one individual closely involved with the trial).

The last relatively comprehensive study of musical education in the UK was undertaken in 1978, commissioned by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation (Training Musicians: A Report to the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation on the training of professional musicians (London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, 1978)), when many of the specialist music schools were still in a state of relative infancy. Nothing was mentioned in this about the dangers of abuse in such institutions, though their role in terms of producing professional musicians remains a consideration throughout. It is now high time, after 35 years, for a new report, more detailed and sophisticated in its methodology than before, to be produced as the outcome of an inquiry. The specialist music schools in particular have inhabited a nebulous and secretive world with insufficient external scrutiny, despite being in receipt of a considerable amount of state money.


Networks

In spite of all of the above, various individuals who have been investigating abuse in musical education remain wary or sceptical about positing the existence of a ‘ring’. It would probably be more accurate to refer to large overlapping networks of individuals frequently complicit in facilitating or covering up each other’s actions, rather than something more centrally organised.

Examples of the connections involved include the fact of teachers frequently moving between multiple institutions. Many also teach on summer courses or are involved with orchestral and choral coaching. There are especially intricate networks connecting both former and current staff at Chetham’s in particular.


Factors deterring students from coming forward

There are many factors mitigating against students or former students from coming forward either to the police or the media about experiences of abuse. These include the factor of peer pressure and the strong potential for ostracisation by alumni communities, fears for professional reputation, and minimisation or trivialisation of the issue of psychological abuse. Arguments have also been made about how uncovering of abuse this will hurt funding for classical music at a time when it is most vulnerable (see, for example, Richard Morrison, ‘Music teaching’s dark past is in danger of destroying its future’, BBC Music Magazine, April 2013, p. 25 and for a more fervent expression of this, Denis Joe, ‘Don’t let abuse fears ruin music: A Savile-style inquiry into one of the UK’s top music schools could wreck the informality essential to music tuition’, Spiked Online, 7/3/13). Others have attacked those who have come forward concerning ‘historic’ abuse at institutions on the grounds that revelations of such experiences have a harmful effect upon those studying at the institutions today (this has been a recurrent complaint by many current parents and pupils posting to Norman Lebrecht’s blog). Knowledge of the experiences of Frances Andrade in court also gives fear to those who might have to undergo a similar experience. Furthermore, some of the abuse would not at the time have constituted a criminal act, if consensual, and with victims over the age of 16 prior to 2003.

The difficulties of coming forward are exacerbated for younger victims – it is well-known and often commented how many abuse victims wait several decades before deciding to speak out (See, for example, Connie Burrows Horton and Tracy K. Cruise, Child Abuse and Neglect: The Schools’ Response (New York: The Guilford Press, 2001), pp. 39-40; Thomas G. Plante and Kathleen L. McChesney, Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church: A Decade of Crisis, 2002-2012 (Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2011), p. 20; David Gray and Peter Watt, Giving Victims a Voice: joint report into sexual allegations made against Jimmy Savile (London: NSPCC, 2013), p. 20; Kathryn Westcott and Tom de Castella, ‘The decades-long shadow of abuse’, BBC News Magazine, 25/10/12). This very fact unfortunately likely plays a fact in the widespread perception in amongst the music world (and propagated by those managing its institutions) that abuse is primarily ‘historic’, belonging to a more distant era. That this may simply be the result of the fact that victims of more recent abuse do not yet feel ready to speak out should not be discounted. Furthermore, musicians in their 20s and 30s tend to have more precarious careers (unless hugely successful), and are more vulnerable to hostile criticism, whether made explicit or not, such as might come about as a result of their taking their complaints forward. It should be borne in mind that as the professional world of classical music is relatively small and many individuals are closely connected through shared professional and educational experiences, there can be especially great difficulties in victims maintaining anonymity if they go forward, on account of easy spread of gossip and relative ease of identifying them.


Conclusion: Issues for an Inquiry

between 1945 and 1989 only four public inquiries were held into institutional abuse. These were the Court Lees inquiry (1967) into excessive use of corporal punishment at Court Less approved school in Surrey, the Leesway Children’s Home inquiry (1985) following offences of indecency involving the taking of photographs of children, the Kincora Boy’s Home, Belfast, inquiry (1986), following suggestions of a paedophile ring operative at the institution, and the Melanie Klein House inquiry (1988) into the use of restraints upon older girls in an establishment managed by Greenwich Social Services Department (see Brian Corby, Alan Doig & Vicki Roberts, Public Inquiries into Abuse of Children in Residential Care (London & Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2001), pp. 79-81 for an overview of these four inquiries). Numerous other inquiries have followed since the 1990s, and the sexual abuse of children began to feature more prominently (one study suggests that the inquiries in the mid-1980s viewed sexual abuse in institution as part of a ‘bad apple’ syndrome (ibid. p. 83)). Most relevant to this amongst the post-1989 inquiries include the following:

(a) Scotforth House Residential School (1992), involving the physical abuse of children with learning difficulties;
(b) Castle Hill Residential School, Shropshire (1993) – sexual abuse of pupils by head of the school
(c) Oxendon House (1994) – inappropriate restraint and therapy techniques used by staff on older children with emotional and behavioural problems
(d) Islington: community homes, (1995) – concerns about risks to children from staff with previous child abuse convictions (see the charts of inquiries in Corby et al, Public Inquiries into Abuse of Children, pp. 77-78).

Other prominent inquiries from this period, including the Waterhouse Inquiry into abuse in children’s homes in North Wales (2000), can fairly be considered to be of a different nature to that requested here.

The Castle Hill Inquiry pinpointed the extent to which the abusing headmaster, Ralph Morris, was a ‘charismatic leader of the school who was very much in control of the environment’, how the particularities of the boys (who exhibited educational and behavioural problems) led to their not being trusted to be able to tell the truth, and called for independent schools to be brought more under the purview of authorities in order that allegations of abuse can be seen in their entirety and appropriately responses made (Corby et al, Public Inquiries into Abuse of Children, p. 84).

But also relevant in some respects as a model for an inquiry into abuse in musical education would be the ongoing Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry set up by the Northern Ireland Executive (http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/historical-institutional-abuse (accessed 28/5/13)). Noted in particular are the following:

• The “Acknowledgement Forum” allows people to contribute their experiences without any of the stress of having to appear on a witness stand. All info to be collated into a report, and records destroyed after the Inquiry ends.
• The “Statutory Inquiry” is more public and involves questioning, but not agressive cross-examination (and names cannot be published by the press). They have the legal authority to force institutions to release documents or appear for questioning if needed.

This may be a good model for the workings of an inquiry into abuse in musical education.

Issues which a public inquiry might address would include the following:

• The extent and nature of abuse of all types in specialist music education, providing opportunities for victims past and present to achieve some type of closure and be heard.
• The historical roots of secondary specialist music education since the foundation of the five schools between 1962 and 1972, and the models in terms of pedagogy and child welfare upon which they drew.
• The nature of psychological and emotional abuse and the dangers of its occurrence in musical education.
• The nature of regulation and safeguarding and how this affects independent schools who receive state money through the Music and Dance scheme. Proposals for the extent to which these schools might be brought in line with other state institutions.
• Requirements in terms of formal training for instrumental teachers.
• Only a minority of students will likely attain professional careers – potential for serious damage to those who don’t, who have devoted their all to becoming a musician.
• Guru teachers and their webs of control – charismatic cults and their effects upon pedagogy.
• Questions about whether the central focus of exclusive 1-1 teaching remains appropriate.
• The culture of classical music and the exploitation of unaccountable power towards those whose careers and livelihoods are always vulnerable. The extension of such a culture and its values into musical education.
• The tendency of musical institutions to insulate themselves from the wider world and normal demands in terms of humane treatment of those they nurture.
• That there is a sexual component to music (and musical performance) could not be plausibly denied– but how is this to be handled when teaching young musicians?

It is clear that there is abundant evidence pointing to widespread abuse within musical education. Some of this may be able to be addressed via criminal proceedings, but as indicated elsewhere, there are various factors deterring victims from speaking out; furthermore various forms of abuse do not constitute criminal activity (where the victim was between 16 and 18 prior to the 2003 Sexual Offences Act, or where psychological maltreatment is involved) or cannot be prosecuted because the perpetrator is now dead. Some police involved with criminal investigations such as Operation Kiso have made clear to the author that institutional culpability and the structural workings of institutions such as facilitate abuse are beyond their remit. And the institutions of musical education have not been subject to sustained investigation and scrutiny for a long time, despite being the recipient of state monies; wider issues of pedagogical approach and its relationship to child welfare in such contexts are greatly needed. It is for these reasons that it is believed that a public inquiry should be undertaken as soon as possible into musical education and the potential therein for abuse.

Appendix: Article by Ian Pace for Times Educational Supplement, published online 8/5/13

The culture of music education lends itself to abuse

Ian Pace studied piano, composition and percussion at Chetham’s School of Music from 1978 to 1986, followed by Oxford and Cardiff universities and the Juilliard School in New York. He has a dual career as concert pianist and historical musicologist, and is lecturer in music and head of performance at City University London. He writes here in a personal capacity.

My own formative years, between ages 10 and 18, were spent at Chetham’s – better known as Chet’s – from 1978 to 1986, always as a boarder.

I should make clear from the beginning that I do not consider myself to have been a victim of sustained abuse at the school. I received a good deal of valuable teaching that helped towards my professional career as a pianist and musicologist. However, the recent conviction of one teacher and the police investigation of many others have forced me to re-evaluate those times, the values I encountered and absorbed there, and their relationship to a wider classical music culture.

Many among the alumni have come together in recent months, often for the first time in several decades, and frequently with the help of social media. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the conviction of one teacher and allegations against others have been traumatic for many. They have led to varying degrees of disillusionment, regret, sometimes denial or disbelief. There have been attempts to recapture the most positive elements of the past as an antidote to these shocks.

Hardest of all to accept can be the idea that those who played an integral part in shaping one’s own musical identity and development – a deeply personal thing – may have themselves been deeply corrupted individuals responsible for sometimes heinous acts. An almost frantic piecing together of memories from the time can also give cause for sober reflection upon some aspects of the culture of the school.

In particular, there was the relatively common knowledge of affairs between (mostly male) teachers and (mostly female) students, the latter in most cases were over 16, but still students nonetheless. What sort of distorted values were at play when this was apparently not viewed as anything particularly unusual or untoward? From a youthful perspective, this seemed to bestow a certain status upon some of those involved (occasionally boys as well as girls) perceived as especially adult, sexually mature and sophisticated, despite still being children.

Many of the values and attitudes informing classical music today remain rooted in the 19th century. Among these is the idea that solo performance entails a highly intimate expression of the self, dealing with deeply intimate emotions. Or that it entails a seduction, captivation and bewitchment of one’s audience, which can objectify performer and listener alike. Both place the musician in a vulnerable situation that can be withstood from the vantage point of adult emotional and sexual maturity, but that is extremely testing and potentially dangerous for children.

And the focus of attention is not merely upon the sounds produced but also the visual appearance of the performer, their demeanour, gestures and facial expression. The outfits female musicians (and increasingly males as well) are expected to wear are often highly sexualised.

It would be disingenuous to deny that teenagers of all types, not just musicians, look to older, sexualised role models for inspiration, but when this becomes ingrained within their education itself, it can be ripe for exploitation. When music teachers take it upon themselves to mould not only the musician but the whole person of the young performer, that performer may be at risk of seriously damaging consequences if this is not handled with the utmost care. Most obviously alarming is the possibility of sexualised grooming, as is alleged to have happened in many cases at Chetham’s.

But wider patterns of psychological abuse can equally have devastating results upon students’ personal and emotional well-being, with severe consequences in later life. Behind the sometimes monstrous egos of successful solo musicians you frequently find common traits of narcissistic self-obsession, narrowness of outlook, ruthless competitiveness, vanity and the insatiable need for reassurance. They are all frequently conceived as aspects of “artistic temperament”. Their higher calling seems to exempt them from other laws of reasonable behaviour.

Historical examples of musical “great men” such as Beethoven, Liszt or Wagner serve to legitimise these attitudes and traits. Many conflict sharply with the empathy, humility and generosity of spirit that I believe to be vital for productive teaching.

Yet many musicians are engaged as teachers primarily on the basis of their achievements as performers, and the result can at worst be disastrous. It can lead to the cultivation of entourages of adoring young students to be moulded into quasi-clones of the great guru, as extensions of his or her ego. Sometimes, students who do not conform to these teachers’ expectations can be the subject of jealous resentment leading to callous cruelty through attempts to destroy their confidence. They dissect and amplify the student’s every fault while ignoring their strengths, sometimes in order to humiliate them in front of others.

In either case this constitutes psychological abuse in a way that would be completely unacceptable for a regular state school teacher. But institutions’ reputations are often founded on these “great musicians” and they have the power to make or break a student’s future career. Students’ desperation to please has for too long been allowed to mask a pattern of abusive behaviour.


Index of major original articles on abuse

I am in the process of preparing longer bibliographies of both published and online articles relating to issues of institutionalised abuse, specifically the areas on which I have concentrated – abuse in music schools and private schools, the Paedophile Information Exchange, and abuse involving politicians. Having recently reblogged a large number of articles from the Spotlight blog, I realise my site may not be so easy to navigate, so I am providing here a list with links of all my significant original articles.


General

New Cross-Party Group of MPs calling for Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse (3/6/14)

Please contact your MP to ask for their support for a national inquiry into child abuse (5/6/14)

The stock government reply to queries about a national inquiry into organised child abuse (15/6/14, also regularly updated)

Peter McKelvie’s response to Sir Tony Baldry MP (9/7/14)

British Association of Social Workers contacts its 14K members calling for them to support organised abuse inquiry (20/6/14)

Published Articles on Geoffrey Dickens, Leon Brittan, and the Dossier (2/7/14)

Dickensgate – Guest Blog Post by Brian Merritt on Inconsistencies in Leon Brittan’s Accounts (6/7/14)

House of Commons debate 26/6/14 following publication of Savile reports (26/6/14)

On the Eve of Possible Major Revelations – and a Reply to Eric Joyce (1/7/14)


Abuse in Musical Education and the Music World

Reported Cases of Abuse in Musical Education, 1990-2012, and Issues for a Public Inquiry (30/12/13) (this post is in need of some updating to mention other cases during the period in question)

The Trial of Michael and Kay Brewer and the Death of Frances Andrade, and the Aftermath, 2013 (12/8/14)

Proposed Guidelines to protect both Music Teachers and Students – a starting point for discussion (21/2/15)

New stories and convictions of abuse in musical education, and the film of the Institute of Ideas debate (11/1/14) (also in need of updating)

Petition for an inquiry into sexual and psychological abuse at Chetham’s School of Music and other specialist institutions (original version – each version has a different long list of comments) (16/2/13)

Petition for an Inquiry into Sexual and other Abuse at Specialist Music Schools – The List of Signatories (19/2/13)

Re-opened until May 31st, 2013 – Petition for an Inquiry into Abuse in Specialist Music Education (9/5/13) (the final version)

A further call to write to MPs to support an inquiry into abuse in musical education (26/11/13)

In the Aftermath of the Brewer Sentencing – A Few Short Thoughts and Pieces of Information (27/3/13)

Michael Brewer – a powerful Director of Music, not just a provincial choirmaster or music teacher (28/3/13)

Reports from the Malcolm Layfield Trial (2/6/15)

Chris Ling’s Views on Sexing Up Classical Music (11/2/13)

Robert Waddington, Former Dean of Manchester Cathedral, and Chetham’s School of Music (12/5/13)

The 1980 Department of Education and Science Report into Chetham’s School of Music, National Archives ED 172/598/2 (20/9/15)

Contact details for Greater Manchester Police relating to Chetham’s (11/4/13)

Publication of Reports into Chetham’s by ISI and MCC – Senior Management and Governors should consider their position (3/4/13)

New Surrey Safeguarding Report on suicide of Frances Andrade draws attention to dangers of music education (10/4/14)

Alun Jones to be new Head of Chetham’s – and a list of SMS Heads and Music Directors (13/12/15)

Marcel Gazelle and the Culture of the Early Yehudi Menuhin School (7/5/13)

Craig Edward Johnson, the Yehudi Menuhin School, Adrian Stark, and wider networks? (8/4/14)

Contact Details for Surrey Police, in relation to the Yehudi Menuhin School (11/5/13)

Philip Pickett arrested on 15 charges, and interview with Clare Moreland in The Times (14/2/14)

The case of Ian Lake, and reflections on the year (30/12/13)

Clifford Hindley: Pederasty and Scholarship (3/3/14)

Abuse minimisation as an example of the writing of history as kitsch (14/7/13)

New article in Times Educational Supplement on abuse in musical education – and public debate on October 19th, Barbican Centre (3/10/13)

A message from another victim of abuse at a UK music school, calling for others to come forward (25/11/13)

Call to speak out on bullying and psychological/emotional abuse in music (9/1/14)

Alan Doggett, first conductor of Joseph and Jesus Christ Superstar, and the Paedophile Information Exchange (28/3/14) (an updated version of original post from 7/3/14)

New revelations on Alan Doggett, and Colin Ward’s 1981 article on Doggett and Tom O’Carroll (25/3/14)

Further on Alan Doggett – child prostitution and blaming victims at Colet Court School (28/3/14)

Peter Righton’s Diaries: Benjamin Britten, Peter Pears and Michael Davidson (11/5/14)

Benjamin Britten and Peter Righton – A Response from the Britten-Pears Foundation (12/9/14)

Geoff Baker on El Sistema: sexual and other abuse in an authoritarian, hierarchical, archaic music culture (15/11/14)


The Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) and associated areas

NCCL and PIE – documentary evidence 1 (25/2/14)

NCCL Documentary Evidence 2 – Sexual Offences – Evidence to the Criminal Law Revision Committee 1976 (7/4/14)

PIE – documentary evidence 2 – from Magpie 1-8 (trigger warning – contains disturbing material) (26/2/14)

PIE – documentary evidence 3 – from Magpie 9-17 (trigger warning – contains disturbing material) (26/2/14)

PIE – documentary evidence 4 – UP, ‘Childhood Rights’, and Paedophilia – some questions and answers (27/2/14)

PIE – Documentary Evidence 5 – Contact Ads (9/3/14)

PIE – Documentary Evidence 6 – Chairperson’s Report 1975/76 (16/3/14)

PIE – Documentary Evidence 7 – Steven Adrian Smith’s History of the Movement (31/3/14)

PIE – Documentary Evidence 8 – Mary Manning in Community Care and Auberon Waugh in The Spectator, 1977 (16/7/14)

The PIE Manifesto (6/3/14) (link to Spotlight blog from 18/4/13)

PIE and the Home Office: Three+ members/supporters on inside, funded, magazine printed and phone line (15/3/14)

PIE and the Gay Left in Britain – The Account by Lucy Robinson – plus various articles newly online (29/6/14)

Antony Grey and the Sexual Law Reform Society 1 (26/8/14)

Antony Grey and the Sexual Law Reform Society 2 (29/9/14)

Tim Tate – Chapter on Paedophiles from book ‘Child Pornography: An Investigation’ (4/8/14)

Mary Whitehouse and Charles Oxley on PIE – and another letter to Leon Brittan (8/7/14)

Published Articles on Geoffrey Dickens, Leon Brittan, and the Dossier (2/7/14)

Dickensgate – Guest Blog Post by Brian Merritt on Inconsistencies in Leon Brittan’s Accounts (6/7/14)

The File on Peter Hayman in the National Archives (30/1/15)

Two Obituaries of Peter Hayman, Senior Diplomat, MI6 Officer and PIE Member (6/3/14)

Clifford Hindley: Pederasty and Scholarship (3/3/14)

Peter Righton – His Activities up until the early 1980s (21/8/14)

Letter to Guardian from 1963 from a Peter Righton on Books dealing with Sex for 14-year olds (20/8/14)

Peter Righton – Counselling Homosexuals (1973) (2/9/15)

Peter Righton’s Articles for Social Work Today (5/6/14)

Peter Righton and Morris Fraser’s Chapters in ‘Perspectives on Paedophilia’ (5/6/14)

Peter Righton’s writing on child abuse in Child Care: Concerns and Conflicts – his cynical exploitation of a post-Cleveland situation (28/8/15)

Peter Righton, Antony Grey and Kevin O’Dowd in conversation on therapy (26/8/14)

Peter Righton was questioned about child sex offences in May 1993 and November 1994 (21/8/14)

The Larchgrove Assessment Centre for Boys in Glasgow that even Peter Righton found to be cruel (20/8/14)

Brian Taylor and Ken Plummer’s Chapters, and Bibliography, from ‘Perspectives on Paedophilia’ (29/6/14)

Peter Righton’s Diaries: Benjamin Britten, Peter Pears and Michael Davidson (11/5/14)

Benjamin Britten and Peter Righton – A Response from the Britten-Pears Foundation (12/9/14)

Peter Righton – Further Material (12/6/14)

Peter Righton obituary in Ardingly College magazine (16/7/14)

Reports from the Richard Alston Trial (20/8/15)

From the memoirs of John Henniker-Major, 8th Baron Henniker (1916-2004) (3/3/15)

Dr Morris Fraser, Belfast, Long Island New York, Islington (17/10/14) (This is a link to a post on Charlotte Russell’s blog, but so important I wanted to include it here)

The Love and Attraction Conference (1977) and Book (1979) (7/7/14)

Betrayal of Youth (1986) – including the contributions of Middleton, Owens, Faust, Tatchell (5/7/14)

Academia and Paedophilia 1: The Case of Jeffrey Weeks and Indifference to Boy-Rape (29/9/14)

The Uranians #1 – the nineteenth/early twentieth century PIE? (24/5/14)


Public Schools

Alan Doggett, first conductor of Joseph and Jesus Christ Superstar, and the Paedophile Information Exchange (28/3/14) (an updated version of original post from 7/3/14)

New revelations on Alan Doggett, and Colin Ward’s 1981 article on Doggett and Tom O’Carroll (25/3/14)

Further on Alan Doggett – child prostitution and blaming victims at Colet Court School (28/3/14)

Craig Edward Johnson, the Yehudi Menuhin School, Adrian Stark, and wider networks? (8/4/14)

Extraordinarily powerful article by Alex Renton on the abusive world of British boarding schools (4/5/14)

Colet Court School and St Paul’s: A Collection of Articles from The Times (8/5/14)

Benjamin Ross’s account of Colet Court School (8/5/14)

Criminal abuse in the classroom as portrayed by D.H. Lawrence (4/5/14)


Politicians, Government and Abuse

General

Call for All Political Leaders and Leadership Candidates to Pledge Full Co-operation with Abuse Inquiry (9/7/15)

What leading UK politicians should pledge about organised child abuse (17/10/14)

The Meeting with the Abuse Inquiry Secretariat at Millbank Tower, Friday October 31st, 2014 (1/11/14)

Labour’s nominees for inquiry chair, and a left ‘establishment’ (6/11/14)

Elm Guest House: Vigil, September 15th, 2014, and Links to Newspaper Reports (16/9/14)

New Cross-Party Group of MPs calling for Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse (3/6/14)

Please contact your MP to ask for their support for a national inquiry into organised child abuse (5/6/14, regularly updated).

The stock government reply to queries about a national inquiry into organised child abuse (15/6/14, also regularly updated)

British Association of Social Workers contacts its 14K members calling for them to support organised abuse inquiry (20/6/14)

Peter McKelvie’s response to Sir Tony Baldry MP (9/7/14)

House of Commons debate 26/6/14 following publication of Savile reports (26/6/14)

On the Eve of Possible Major Revelations – and a Reply to Eric Joyce (1/7/14)

A few good politicians – Becky Milligan at the office of Simon Danczuk, with Matt Baker, and the personal impact of abuse campaigning (18/7/14)

Ed Miliband should be leading the calls for a wide-ranging abuse inquiry (3/5/14)

Article from Telegraph – Simon Danczuk on child sex allegations involving senior Westminster figures (15/5/14)

Harvey Proctor’s Statement Today – and the False Claims about Tom Watson and other MPs (28/5/15)

PIE and the Home Office: Three+ members/supporters on inside, funded, magazine printed and phone line (15/3/14)

Who are the Mystery Liberal MPs Des Wilson refers to? (27/4/14)

Sir Maurice Oldfield, Sir Michael Havers, and Kincora – guest blog post from Brian Merritt (10/7/14)

William Malcolm, the murdered paedophile who may have been about to expose a VIP ring (21/7/14)


Leon Brittan and Geoffrey Dickens

Published Articles on Geoffrey Dickens, Leon Brittan, and the Dossiers (2/7/14)

Dickensgate – Guest Blog Post by Brian Merritt on Inconsistencies in Leon Brittan’s Accounts (6/7/14)

Leon Brittan – A guest post by Tim Tate on the investigations into and evidence relating to him (23/1/15)

Leon Brittan – Interview with Tim Tate on BCFM, 23/1/15 (24/1/15)

Leon Brittan, Special Branch and the creation of a surveillance state (25/1/15)

Douglas Hurd on Leon Brittan at the Home Office (5/7/14)


Peter Morrison

Peter Morrison – the child abuser protected by MI5, the Cabinet Secretary, and Margaret Thatcher – updated July 2015 (26/7/15)

Peter Morrison and the cover-up in the Tory Party – fully updated (6/10/14)

Yes, Labour politicians need to answer questions about PIE and NCCL, but so do the Tories about Morrison, and the Lib Dems about Smith (25/2/14)

Tim Tate’s Questions to Lord Armstrong, and Armstrong’s Answer (26/7/15)


Fiona Woolf

Fiona Woolf, Leon Brittan and William Hague – conflicts of interest (11/9/14)

Fiona Woolf – the untruth in her letter to the Home Secretary (21/10/14)


Scottish networks

Colin Tucker, steward to Fiona Woolf, Fettesgate and the Scottish ‘Magic Circle’ Affair, and Wider Networks – Part 1 (28/10/14)

Colin Tucker, steward to Fiona Woolf, Fettesgate and the Scottish ‘Magic Circle’ Affair, and Wider Networks – Part 2 (20/11/14)

A new transcription of the audio tape of the interview with the customs officer – and some comments on the recording (29/7/14) (relates to allegations against a former cabinet minister)


Lambeth and the New Labour Politician

Abuse in Lambeth, Operation Ore, and the Blair Minister(s) – Press Reports so far (16/7/14)


Greville Janner and Frank Beck

Judge in 1991 Leicestershire sex abuse case on ‘people in high places’ (24/5/14)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #1 (24/5/14) (these reports say much about the allegations against former Labour MP Greville Janner which were made in court)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #2 (24/5/14)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #3 (10/7/14)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #4 (10/7/14)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #5 (10/7/14)

Decision not to arrest Greville Janner in 1991 – then Attorney General and DPP need to answer questions (8/8/14)

The documents in the Andrew Faulds archives on Greville Janner (4/10/14)

Greville Janner was very drawn to children – some press clippings (16/4/15)

Greville Janner’s view on a 1997 case of Nazi War Criminal with dementia (16/4/15)

And another case with Janner calling in 2001 for extradition of war criminal with dementia (16/4/15)

Greville Janner and Margaret Moran – trial of facts more likely for expenses fiddling than child abuse? (27/6/15)


Other

Child abuse and identity politics – the normalisation of abuse on such grounds (18/7/14)

Anne Lakey didn’t ‘seduce’ or ‘take the virginity’ of a 13-year old boy – she sexually abused them (24/6/15)

Gore Vidal – paedophile, literary lover of child rape (11/8/14)

Germaine Greer’s Apologia for Child Abuse (27/6/14)

More pro-child sexual abuse propaganda from Germaine Greer (12/11/14).

Academia and Paedophilia 1: The Case of Jeffrey Weeks and Indifference to Boy-Rape (29/9/14)

The Uranians #1 – the nineteenth/early twentieth century PIE? (24/5/14)

Simon Callow on the paedophile exploits of André Gide, Oscar Wilde, Lord Alfred Douglas and others (31/7/14)

Liz Davies’ Open Letter to Margaret Hodge (3/8/14)

Paul Foot on Kincora Boys’ Home, and Recent Kincora Articles (1/8/14)

Paul Foot on Kincora – Appendix with Colin Wallace documents, and mention of Morris Fraser (9/8/14)

Claire Prentice in 1998 on Jimmy Savile, Cyril Smith, and Mummy’s Boys (30/6/14)

Mary Whitehouse’s Favourite TV Programme – Jim’ll Fix It (7/7/14)

Elm Guest House: Vigil, September 15th, 2014, and Links to Newspaper Reports (16/9/14)

Abuse in Lambeth, Operation Ore, and the Blair Minister(s) – Press Reports so far (16/7/14)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #1 (24/5/14)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #2 (24/5/14)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #3 (10/7/14)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #4 (10/7/14)

Full set of reports from the 1991 Frank Beck Trial #5 (10/7/14)

Decision not to arrest Greville Janner in 1991 – then Attorney General and DPP need to answer questions (8/8/14)

The documents in the Andrew Faulds archives on Greville Janner (4/10/14)

Be very sceptical about online communications laws which protect the powerful – social media and the right to offend (20/10/14)

Dealing with workplace bullying – and the tears of shame that its facilitators should weep (31/7/15)


PIE and the Home Office: Three+ members/supporters on inside, funded, magazine printed and phone line

The extent to which the Paedophile Information Exchange established a thorough presence at the Home Office in the late 1970s and early 1980s is now becoming clear as more information becomes available. What transpires is alarming:

(a) According to a whistleblower who worked under senior civil servant (Assistant Secretary) Clifford Hindley, Hindley dismissed the objections of another member of staff to government money going to PIE, who received a total of £70 000 between 1977 and 1980. A recent report has quoted the whistleblower saying this funding was at the request of Special Branch, who may have been pursuing some undercover operation to monitor paedophiles; late former Home Office Minister Tim Raison must, according to the whistleblower, have approved the application. After early retirement in 1983, Hindley published a series of pro-pederastic articles on music and classical Greece in scholarly journals. whose arguments were scarcely-disguised PIE propaganda.

(b) PIE chair Steven Adrian Smith (who replaced Tom O’Carroll), also known as Steven Freeman, used a telephone number at the Home Office as the contact point for PIE, whilst he was working there as an electrical contractor, on behalf of firm Complete Maintenance Ltd. According to his own account, Smith stored file material in cabinets at the Home Office and received full security clearance from Scotland Yard, (Keith Dovkants, ‘Child sex ring’s ‘Home Office Link’, Standard, November 7th, 1984; Alex Marunchak, ‘Child-Sex Boss in Whitehall Shock’, The Sun, August 15th, 1982; Steven A. Smith, ‘PIE, from 1980 Until its Demise in 1985’, in The Betrayal of Youth: Radical Perspectives on Childhood Sexuality, Intergenerational Sex, and the Social Oppression of Children and Young People, edited Warren Middleton (London: CL Publications, 1986), pp. 215-245). Smith claims he was provided with a furnished office as part of his contract, from which he could use the phone line, but another source connected to the Home Office informs me that it was unthinkable that such a contractor would be given access to a Home Office phone line. Smith was later said in court probably to have actually published the PIE magazine (which would then have been Minor Problems) in the Home Office itself (Sue Clough, ‘Paedophile jailed over child porn material’, Press Association, December 16th, 1991).

(c) PIE Secretary and Treasurer Barry Cutler was also employed in the Home Office in the early 1980s, until being discovered by the News of the World, whereupon he was sacked (Michael Parker, Stuart White and Alex Marunchak, ‘The Nasty Nine: Bosses who mastermind the secret web of filth’, News of the World, August 28th, 1983). Cutler was also highly active in the Campaign for Homosexual Equality, acting in 1999 as a spokesperson for the organisation on the abolition of Clause 28 of the 1988 Local Government Act (Graeme Wilson, ‘Fury at move to drop schools’ gay propaganda ban’, Daily Mail, August 23rd, 1999), and remaining on their Executive Committee at least as late as 2010.

(d) A Whitehall civil servant received a series of slides with images of abuse of young boys and obscene letters delivered to his departmental address. When this was discovered, one colleague’s protests that these materials should be handed over to the police were ignored, and it was treated as a purely internal matter (‘Two-year cover-up on dirty pictures’, Daily Express, November 25th, 1983). It is not known whether this was one of the three individuals above.

(e) Adrian Fulford (now Lord Justice Fulford), who was named last week in the Mail on Sunday as a key organiser of the so-called Conspiracy Against Public Morals to support key PIE figures, and wrote an article defending PIE (Martin Beckford, ‘High Court judge and the child sex ring: Adviser to Queen was founder of paedophile support group to keep offenders out of jail’, Mail on Sunday, March 9th, 2014), also acted as Smith’s defence barrister in a court case concerning publishing obscene material featuring children in 1991. Smith had previously fled to the Netherlands to avoid trial, and was tried after being deported by Dutch authorities (Sue Clough, ‘Paedophile jailed over child porn material’, Press Association, December 16th, 1991).

The Prime Minister or at least the Home Secretary need to make a statement about this level of PIE infiltration (involving three, possibly four individuals directly linked to the organisation) into the very government department responsible for law and order. Also, to answer the following questions:

(i) who was responsible for their employment (and dismissal or delay thereof) these individuals?
(ii) which ministers (Labour and/or Conservative) would have been aware of these individuals’s presence in the department?
(iii) which would have authorised the payments to PIE?

During the period of PIE’s official existence, 1974-1984, the Home Secretaries were Roy Jenkins (1974-1976), Merlyn Rees (1976-1979), William Whitelaw (1979-1983) and Leon Brittan (1983-1985); Ministers for Home Affairs were Lord Harris (1974-1979), Alex Lyon (1974-1976), Brynmor John (1976-1979), Lord Boston (Jan-May 1979), Leon Brittan (1979-1981), Timothy Raison (1979-1983), Patrick Mayhew (1981-1983), and David Waddington (1983-1987); Junior Ministers and Parliamentary Private Secretaries were Shirley Summerskill (1974-1979), Lord Belstead (1979-1982), Lord Elston (1982-1984), David Mellor (1983-1986) and Lord Glenarthur (1984-1986).

We also know that senior diplomat and MI6 officer Peter Hayman was an active member of PIE, and that members of PIE (including Smith – see above) received active political and legal support from a current High Court Judge (see Beckford, ‘High Court judge’, above); a further judge, now Chief Coroner, Peter Thornton, was also involved with the provision such support (Martin Beckford, ‘Now Chief Coroner is exposed as paedophile apologist who wanted age of consent to be 14’, Daily Mail, March 16th, 2014). Leading PIE member Peter Righton managed to wean his way into the whole social work and child protection world, occupying senior and influential positions (see a whole range of articles here), and his name has been linked to networks operating in public schools (see Eileen Fairweather, ‘Paedophile ring alleged at top public schools’, Standard, September 19th, 1996) and children’s homes. Not to mention PIE being affiliated to NCCL, who would take out adverts in two different PIE publications, Understanding Paedophilia and Magpie; current senior Labour politicians, including Deputy Leader Harriet Harman and Shadow Minister for Policing Jack Dromey were involved at the heart of NCCL at this time. The names of other senior politicians, including late MPs Peter Morrison (Conservative) and Cyril Smith (Liberal Democrat) have also been publicly linked to organised abuse involving young children in homes.

This is an extremely serious situation which demonstrates that the PIE network was able to infiltrate some of the upper echelons of British government and society in the 1970s and 1980s, This needs to be thoroughly investigated with proper resources and funding.

I also have clear information on the extent to which PIE members or sympathisers were very influential in different branches of academia – sociology, social work, child protection and the study of child abuse, criminology, music and the arts, and gender and sexuality studies. Some of their work was published by reputable scholarly journals (as I have detailed in the case of Hindley), and many obtained senior positions in leading universities. Various of their students continued to develop their ideas. To this day, some of their publications are still cited or otherwise used as if they were reliable and trustworthy, to such an extent that I believe elements of these professions have been corrupted.

Clear documentary evidence points to a highly-organised network with PIE at its centre; a network responsible not simply for the advocacy of paedophilia, but the organisation international rings of abusers and for the trafficking in child pornography. The seriousness of this cannot be underestimated. All politicians should be supporting the work of Tom Watson MP in trying to bring to light this awful network (which cannot be assumed to be merely ‘historic’), and address honestly the ways in which its activities and ideologies may have infiltrated their own parties.


Clifford Hindley: Pederasty and Scholarship

[UPDATE: @murunbuch, who runs the fantastic Spotlight blog, has tweeted to indicate his guess that the Home Office employee mentioned in this 1983 report in the Daily Express, who had pornographic photographs of children sent to his departmental address, was Hindley]

Both Exaro News and the Sunday People broke an important story yesterday concerning a senior civil servant at the Home Office who has been identified as blocking any objections to funding being distributed to the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE). This civil servant was J. Clifford Hindley, who was head of the Home Office’s voluntary services unit (VSU) and an assistant secretary at the Home Office, in which capacity he oversaw ‘co-ordination of government action in relation to voluntary services and funding of certain voluntary organisations’, with the VSU dealing with ‘community programmes’ (David Hencke and Alex Varley-Winter, ‘Revealed: Whitehall official who blocked objections to fund PIE’, Exaro News, March 1st, 2014). Hindley was also secretary to the Devlin Committee on Evidence of Identification in Criminal Cases (‘The Age of Consent for Male Homosexuals’, Criminal Law Review 595-603 (1986)).

One colleague of Hindley’s at VSU found that PIE had made a re-application to the department for funding in 1979 or 1980, and raised concerns with Hindley on the grounds that the organisation campaigned to legalise sexual relations with children. However, Hindley apparently just took away the paperwork and told his colleague to drop his objections. This individual recently approached Labour MP and leading anti-abuse campaigner Tom Watson, who took up the issue with current Home Secretary Theresa May, who ordered the permanent secretary at the Home Office, Mark Sedwill, to investigate; the individual has also been speaking to Operation Fernbridge, who are looking into grave allegations of children being procured for VIP guests at Elm Guest House in Barnes (ibid; see also Tom Watson, ‘After 30 years without an answer it’s time to find out who protected the infamous Paedophile Information Exchange’, Mirror, November 21st, 2013; and Stephen Wright, Tim Shipman and James Slack, ‘Labour MP calls for probe into state cash for Paedophile Information Exchange after claims files that prove it received taxpayers’ money have been shredded’, Daily Mail, February 25th, 2014; on Operation Fernbridge, see the range of articles here). Between 1977 and 1980, a total of £70 000 (equivalent to around £400 000 today) is said to have been given to PIE by both Labour and Conservative governments; the grant re-application which came up in 1979-80 was probably a renewal of a grant given since 1977. A Freedom of Information investigation has revealed that all Home Office files about PIE since 1979 have (legally) been destroyed. During the period of PIE’s official existence, 1974-1984, the Home Secretaries were Roy Jenkins (1974-1976), Merlyn Rees (1976-1979), William Whitelaw (1979-1983) and Leon Brittan (1983-1985); Ministers for Home Affairs were Lord Harris (1974-1979), Alex Lyon (1974-1976), Brynmor John (1976-1979), Lord Boston (Jan-May 1979), Leon Brittan (1979-1981), Timothy Raison (1979-1983), Patrick Mayhew (1981-1983), and David Waddington (1983-1987); Junior Ministers and Parliamentary Private Secretaries were Shirley Summerskill (1974-1979), Lord Belstead (1979-1982), Lord Elston (1982-1984), David Mellor (1983-1986) and Lord Glenarthur (1984-1986). It is not yet known whether any of these were aware or consulted about PIE’s funding.

The period in question falls within that during which PIE was affiliated to the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL) and incorporates the police raid in 1978 on the flat of PIE member ‘Mr Henderson’, the alias of former High Commissioner to Canada and deputy head of MI6, Sir Peter Hayman, who was later named in Parliament by Geoffrey Dickens (Hayman was jailed in 1984 on charges of possession of child pornography, and died in 1992) (Kier Mudie and Nick Dorman, ‘Huge sums of TAXPAYER’S cash ‘handed to vile child pervert group’ by Home Office officials’, The People, March 2nd, 2014, at ; see also David Hencke, ‘Revealed: The civil servant in the Home Office’s PIE funding inquiry and his academic articles on boy love’, March 1st, 2014).

But Hindley is also a figure well-familiar to all of those of us interested in the operas of Benjamin Britten; in light of the revelation that he looks very likely to have been responsible for ensuring PIE’s government funding, I wish to consider a selection of his written work and in particular its recurrent and unhealthy fixation upon the theme of pederasty.

Hindley studied classics and philosophy at Oxford, then theology at Cambridge. Following this, he worked for a period as a minister in England, and also as a New Testament scholar, taking a position as Professor New Testament Studies at Serampore College, West Bengal, from 1959 (also serving as Deputy Librarian there, as well as literary editor for the Indian Journal of Theology) as well as being active in the church union movement in North India and publishing several articles (listed in the bibliography at the end). In 1964 he was a joint leader of the Protestant wing of joint Catholic-Protestant meeting on Christian social action problems at St Mary’s College, Kureseong, organised by Jesuit fathers (‘Joint Action’,The Anchor, Vol.8, No. 29, July 16th, 1964, p. 16). He finished his term at Serampore in 1968 (Katherine Smith Diehl, Carey Library Pamphlets: Secular Series; A Catalogue (Serampore, India: The Council of Serampore College, 1968), p. xi). Some time after this (it is not clear whether he left India straight away), Hindley joined the civil service (and appears to have abandoned his theological activities from this point onwards), whilst maintaining a strong interest in music as an amateur pianist and choral singer (see biographies of Hindley in The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 89, No. 1 (Spring 1994), p. 175 and Mervyn Cooke (ed), The Cambridge Companion to Benjamin Britten (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p. vii, and here, here, and here). He was friendly with former Liberal Party leader Jeremy Thorpe (born 1929), who famously was tried (and acquitted) in 1979 on charges of attempted murder of and conspiracy to murder his lover Norman Scott; Thorpe and Hindley dined together at the Reform Club in London (Mudie and Dorman, ‘Huge sums of TAXPAYER’S cash ‘handed to vile child pervert group’’).

Hindley retired from the Home Office in June 1982 (‘People’, Community Care, May 20th, 1982), though three years later published a paper on the ‘The Age of Consent for Male Homosexuals’, (Criminal Law Review 595-603 (1986)), arguing against the recommendations of the Policy Advisory Committee on Sexual Offences (P.A.C.) who in a 1981 report had recommended reducing the male homosexual age of consent to 18; Hindley drew upon various other evidence to argue for equalisation of heterosexual and homosexual ages of consent.

Otherwise, following his retirement until his death in 2006, Hindley lived at least some of the time in Brent Way in Finchley (which address is given at the bottom of the first of his articles on Xenophon) and turned to writing academic articles on musical subjects, predominantly the operas of Benjamin Britten, and also on aspects of sexuality in Ancient Greece, before his death in 2006 (it is not clear if he knew Britten personally, as has been claimed; Hindley’s name does not appear in any of the Britten biographies). One biography cited him as in retirement as having specifically made a study ‘of aspects of ancient Greek pederasty’ (‘Notes on Contributors’, History Workshop Journal, No. 40 (Autumn, 1995), p. 295). The uncomfortable nature of some of these writings may provide a clue to understanding Hindley’s attitudes and inclinations.

It is very hard to deny that there are pederastic themes in some of Britten’s operas: most obviously The Turn of the Screw (1954) and Death in Venice (1971-73, rev. 1973-74) (relating to the arguable presence of such themes in the original literary works of Henry James and Thomas Mann respectively, though modified through librettists and Britten’s musical settings); and possibly also in Peter Grimes and Let’s Make an Opera (The Little Sweep). The works are however generally ambiguous, and for that reason have generated a variety of interpretations, in which context Hindley’s stand out for their unequivocality. Various biographers (not least the late Humphrey Carpenter in his Benjamin Britten: A Biography (London: Faber & Faber, 1992) and John Bridcut in Britten’s Children (London: Faber & Faber, 2006)) have gone to immense lengths to find out whether there was anything untoward in Britten’s relationships with the numerous boys with whom he worked for performances of his operas, works of children’s choirs, and so on; whilst it seems clear that Britten certainly greatly enjoyed the company of young boys, and appears to have been sexually attracted to them, only a small amount of evidence has been uncovered of any exploitation through enactment of these desires. That evidence there is includes the testimony of Harry Morris, who did accuse Britten of abuse (see Bridcut, Britten’s Children, pp. 46-53), and also various accounts chronicled by Bridcut of naked swimming and sharing of beds with boys aged as young as 11.

Hindley wrote eleven different articles on Britten during his retirement, almost all of which maintain an intense focus on the male homosexual/erotic elements to be discerned in the operas. He was far from alone or the first (or last) in this respect – such concerns are equally central to the writings of Philip Brett, Michael Wilcox or Stephen McClatchie, for example – but some of Hindley’s articles differed from the writings of these and others through their specific focus, sometimes quite obsessive, on man-boy love.

Hindley’s first published essay on Britten (Hindley, ‘Love and Salvation in Britten’s ‘Billy Budd’, Music & Letters, Vol. 70, No. 3 (Aug., 1989), pp. 363-381) dealt with the opera Billy Budd (1950-51), whose libretto was fashioned after Melville’s novella by Eric Crozier and E.M. Forster. This is a fastidious piece of research in which Hindley mines the archives to examine different drafts of the libretto, all of which inform his interpretations of parallel doomed homosexual interactions between Billy and the malevolent Master-at-Arms Claggart on one hand, and Billy and the Captain of the ship, Vere (‘Starry Vere’ to Billy), on the other. The character of Billy is certainly highly youthful, sings in sometimes abnormally high registers for a baritone when excited (as in his ode to Vere towards the end of Act 1), and is described by Vere as ‘such a fine specimen of the genus homo, who in the nude might have posed for a statue of a young Adam before the Fall’, and is supposed to look at Vere as ‘a dog of generous breed might turn upon his mater’. Elsewhere he is referred to as ‘Baby’ (by Dansker) or ‘Beauty’ (by Claggart), whilst one of the shanties includes the words ‘My Aunt willy-nilly was winking at Billy’ and ‘She’ll cut up her Billy for pie, For all he’s a catch on the eye’. Vere comes across in Hindley’s interpretation as a type of tortured father-figure for Billy; nonetheless, there is no obvious implication of Billy’s representing any type of pre-pubescent figure, simply an archetype of youth, strength (a ‘flower of masculine beauty and strength’ to Claggart) and a type of innocence married to an upright moral sense. But in this essay, Hindley makes explicit his belief that:

Whatever may be true of some of Britten’s other operas, the question of paedophilia is, I think, not to the point in Billy Budd. While there is some difference in age (unspecified in the opera) between Vere and Billy, they are both grown men, acting in a world of men. They may be contrasted with the midshipmen, who are portrayed as boys with unbroken voices. (p. 364, n. 8)

However, in another article from two years later (‘Britten’s “Billy Budd”: The “Interview Chords” Again’, The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 78, No. 1 (Spring, 1994), pp. 99-126), Hindley looks in detail at one notorious passage from the opera, from Act 2, Scene 2, where a series of thirty-four triadic chords (the so-called ‘interview chords’) are heard whilst Vere communicates to Billy (in a room offstage) the verdict of the drumhead court that he is to be sentenced to death. This passage had been extensively analysed by others (most notably in Arnold Whittall, ‘’Twisted Relations’: Method and Meaning in Britten’s Billy Budd’, Cambridge Opera Journal, Vol. 2, No. 2 (1990), pp. 145-171) in terms of their dominant tonal centre and recurrence elsewhere in the opera, and how a gradual resolution of the more remote harmonies this might be interpreted in terms of themes of Vere’s redemption. Hindley (pp. 99-103) interprets these chords as effecting a modulation from F major into C major, against which the F major opening of the next scene, where Billy lays in irons, acts to convey a sense of a ‘fresh start’. Furthermore (pp. 103-106) he deduces, by an examination of its recurrences through the course of the opera, that the key of F minor can be seen to represent ‘malign fate’, also drawing attention to how deeply the concept of fate which stands above human agency has been analysed in Melville’s novella, not least by poet William Plomer, a friend of both Forster and Britten. With this in mind, Billy (who Hindley argues ‘is not the childish subordinate depicted by Melville, but a man capable of reflecting on fate’ (p. 106)) is seen as the instrument by which Vere is ‘saved’ from such fate, by virtue of being loved by him; a love which cannot be made explicit since the opera was written at a time when homosexuality was still illegal in the UK and deeply taboo (pp. 106-107). Viewing F major as the key associated with Billy, and C major as that with Vere, Hindley presents the chord sequence (which becomes increasingly tranquil) as ultimately representing a calming of Vere from the distraught figure he was when faced by the prospect of informing Billy of his forthcoming execution; ‘Vere’s peace of mind is secured through Billy’s love, which accepts that the duty of the commander must override the feelings of the lover’ (p. 110).

But it is at this point where Hindley looks to link this passage with others in Britten’s output with more clearly pederastic elements. First he evokes an essay by Christopher Palmer examining the third of Britten’s Sechs Hölderlin-Fragmente, specifically his setting of Hölderlin’s Sokrates und Alcibiades (Christopher Palmer (ed), The Britten Companion (London: Faber and Faber, 1984), p. 264), in which Palmer points out Britten used a similar sequence of triads:

Warum huldigest du, heiliger Sokrates,
Diesem Jünglinge stets? Kennest du Größers nicht,
Warum siehet mit Liebe,
Wie auf Götter, dein Aug’ auf ihn?”

[….]

[Why do you court, holy Socrates/Always this youth? Do you know of nothing greater?/Why do you gaze with love/As if at the Gods, your eyes on him?]

Furthermore, Hindley cites Humphrey Carpenter’s suggestion (Carpenter, Britten, p. 137) that W.S., to whom the song is dedicated, was Wolfgang “Wulff” Scherchen, son of the conductor Hermann Scherchen, who Britten met in 1934, when the boy was just thirteen (Bridcut, Britten’s Children, p. 55), and has been claimed to be ‘the figure who embodied Aschenbach’s (and Britten’s own) dilemma in Death in Venice: the enchantment he found in the beauty of boys’ (ibid). Some more recent scholarship has concluded more definitely that a sexual relationship was consummated between Britten and the young Scherchen, but not until four years later (Paul Kildea, Benjamin Britten: A Life in the Twentieth Century (London: Allen Lane, 2013), pp. 138-145), the only such sexual encounter Britten apparently had with anyone other than his long-term lover Peter Pears. Carpenter, as cited by Hindley, suggested the song implied a happy love affair; Hindley seems very keen to link this (at a time before Kildea’s dating of their sexual encounter) with the relationship between Billy and Vere, and brings in his own link with (around fourteen-year old) Tadzio in Death in Venice, by remarking on Britten’s use of a triadic sequence when Aschenbach’s desires are first stirred by the boy in Act 1, Scene 5 of the later opera, writing ‘Whilst most of these passages were composed later than Billy Budd, a number of earlier triadic sequences within the opera itself seem already to have come to signify a form of erotic desire’ (p. 111). To Hindley, the use of triadic sequences signifies an ‘erotic desire’ which is primarily to be linked to its later pederastic manifestations. Later in the essay, Hindley also links a hint of a Lydian inflection in C in the triadic sequence in Budd to a use of a similar musical device in Britten’s early work for piano and orchestra Young Apollo op. 16 (1939), known through Britten’s letters to have been inspired by Wulff, and also to Tadzio’s music in Death in Venice (Hindley, pp. 113-114).

Another essay of Hindley’s, from the same year as the first essay on Budd, is this time concerned with The Turn of the Screw (Hindley, ‘Why Does Miles Die? A Study of Britten’s “The Turn of the Screw”’, The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 74, No. 1 (1990), pp. 1-17) (a two part video of the opera can be viewed here and here). Here, drawing upon the earlier work of Patricia Howard (Patricia Howard (ed), Benjamin Britten: The Turn of the Screw (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985)), Hindley considers two categories of interpretation for Henry James’s novella: the first being that the ghosts of Peter Quint and Miss Jessel, who hover around the children Miles and Flora respectively, represent some objective form of evil which the figure of the Governess battles against; the second holds that they represent an externalisation of the Governess’s own neuroses. Whilst allowing that James’s work is ambiguous, Hindley (pp. 1-2) maintains that the second interpretation is not applicable to the opera by Britten, with libretto by Myfanwy Piper (with whom Hindley had corresponded in 1989, though I have not had an opportunity to read the correspondence – it is kept at Tate Gallery Archive GB 70, Reference Number GB 70 TGA 200410/1/1/1846, dated August 15th, 1989 – see here). Drawing attention to the fact that there is one scene (the closing scene in Act 1) in which Miles and Quint interact without the Governess’s being present, Hindley argues if Quint was a figment of her imagination, then so must be Miles (not allowing that this scene, and that in Act 2, Scene 5 also discussed, might both simply be projections of her most feverish paranoia).

Piper gives words to both Quint and Miss Jessel; Hindley is little interested in the latter (whose presence, musical characterisation, and ambiguity in relationship to Flora are to my mind more striking than those between Quint and Miles, even if they do assume a secondary plot role). To Hindley, Quint’s words communicate ‘ambition, adventure, wealth, a degree of double-dealing, admittedly (“the smooth world’s double face”), but above all the realization of mysterious but deep desires’, and he goes on to write:

Quint expresses a desire for power in leading on the natural curiosity of the boy and the responsiveness which he shows to an older man. But the same may be said of the Governess in her wish to dominate Miles. In none of this do we feel the kind of ghoulish evil which will demand a death. (p. 3 – Miles dies at the end of the opera)

In order to present as benevolent a view of Quint as possible, and thus absolve the possibility he might be viewed as a mysterious and predatory stranger seeking to manipulate and sexually abuse a young boy, Hindley draws once again upon Christopher Palmer’s work, arguing that Quint’s music, making extensive use of celesta and harp, with pentatonic harmonies, has roots in the exotic music of the Balinese gamelan (which Britten had come to know through the work of Colin McPhee, who he met in New York when Britten had left the country at a time of military conscription in 1939, and with whom he would later record some of McPhee’s Balinese transcriptions for two pianos – see Adam Sherkin, ‘The fateful meeting of Benjamin Britten and Colin McPhee’, Musical Toronto, November 10th, 2013) to produce a music which represents to Miles ‘the opening of magic casements, a world of enchantment and glamour, of preternatural, supernatural, unattainable beauty’ (Christopher Palmer, ‘The colour of the music’, in Howard (ed), The Turn of the Screw, p. 105, cited Hindley p. 3). Palmer interprets this as being associated with evil, but Hindley, drawing upon the fact mentioned by Palmer, that Britten avoides the conventional symbol of evil, the interval of a tritone, the diabolus in musica, holds that the score implies ‘beauty and goodness’ for the situation between Quint and Miles. As the late Philip Brett pointed out, however, the orientalist tropes upon which Britten draws can equally signify dread as well as allure, and as such might be read other than as unequivocally affirmative (Philip Brett, ‘Eros and Orientalism in Britten’s Operas’, in Brett, Music and Sexuality in Britten: Selected Essays, edited George E. Haggerty, with introduction by Susan McClary and afterward by Jenny Doctor (Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2006), p. 142). If there is ‘evil’ in the Screw, for Hindley (rarely very interested in female characters at all) this has to be assigned to Miss Jessel rather than Quint (p. 4).

Piper drew upon a line from W.B. Yeats’ poem The Second Coming – ‘The ceremony of innocence is drowned’ – in her libretto (sung by Quint and Miss Jessel at the beginning of Act 2), which she said Britten suggested was a theme of the whole work (Piper cited in Patricia Howard, ‘Myfanwy Piper’s The Turn of the Screw: libretto and synopsis’, in Howard (ed), The Turn of the Screw, p. 49). Against conventional malign interpretations of this line, Hindley argues:

What is “the ceremony of innocence,” and is its drowning a bad thing? A ceremony is an artificial sequence of actions which may have a meaning assigned to it by convention and tradition but which has no intrinsic rightness or authority. Applied to a child, the phrase suggests that in infancy the child accepts everything it is told: its standards of behaviour are derivative. Whether in obedience or disobedience, it follows the judgments imposed upon it by adults. But this acceptance of conventional standards (for no other reason than that they are conventional) can last long into adulthood. In that sense, adults, too, can engage in the “ceremony of innocence.” They can have a kind of unquestioning naïveté about what is going on. They, too, can be described as “innocents”. Drowning the ceremony of innocence, therefore, while it may be taken to refer to a corruption of primal purity, may equally well signify the release of the convention-bound spirit into a world of more mature and sophisticated experience. (p. 5; in n. 6 of this page Hindley draws a parallel with Yeats’ evocation of the breakdown of conventional standards in Europe as a result of the First World War)

When such ‘drowning’ entails the sexual abuse of a child by an adult, it might well suit the purposes of the adult in question to portray this as a ‘release of the convention-bound spirit into a world of more mature and sophisticated experience’ (and here we begin to enter the sort of rhetoric to be found in the PIE journal Magpie – see my earlier posts here and here). There is, however, a perfectly reasonable way of arriving at Hindley’s type of argument above, if one views the drowning of innocence as a by-product of emerging sexuality in general. Hindley, citing the words sung by both Quint and Miss Jessel, ‘Day by day the bars we break/Break the love that wraps them round’, argues that ‘sooner or later the bars [the love of parents or guardians] must be broken if the child is to grow up’ (p. 6). This would concur with an interpretation of the Governess as an over-protective figure who cannot cope with the children developing a will – and a sexual being – of their own, and also resonates with Britten’s routinely misogynistic characterisation of matriarchal figures (as with Miss Sedley (and, in a more complex fashion, Ellen Orford) in Grimes, both Albert’s mother and Lady Billows in Albert Herring, Miss Wingrave in Owen Wingrave and others).

But Hindley goes much further than this. First he writes of the appearance of these lines that ‘It has the mien of an affirmation rather than a threat’ (p. 6), then presents the ‘innocence’ which is lost as being that of the Governess, her ‘unquestioning and naïve acceptance of conventional values, a world in which conflict is virtually unknown and where there are no mysteries’ (p. 7 – I find it hard to imagine that Hindley’s sentiments could not equally be applied to many social or child protection workers). Then he examines Quint’s vocal music, and considers Peter Evans’ interpretation of Quint’s opening calls to Miles as ‘the directly exercised evil influence of the ghosts on the children and, through the terrifying spectacle of the increasing guile and malice which floods their still childish natures, its extension to the governess’ (Peter Evans, The Music of Benjamin Britten (London: J.M. Dent & Sons, 1979), p. 215, cited Hindley p. 8), as well as Patricia Howard’s identification of the fact that the music by which the Governess expresses her wish to protect the children is almost identical to that used by Quint to corrupt them (Howard, ‘Structures: an overall view’, in Howard (ed), The Turn of the Screw, p. 72f), but rejecting this interpretation as follows:

But once Quint’s influence is no longer seen as intrinsically evil, but (potentially, at least) as beneficial, then a solution to the problem suggests itself, one which arises out of the interpretation here offered of the phrase “the ceremony of innocence is drowned.” Read as a metaphor for the maturing of experience, the phrase need not carry the disquieting overtones of “corruption.” To replace the restrictions and limitations of childhood by the free and wide experience of the adult is more gain than loss. No doubt in this process each must make his or her own way, but (as Socrates said of philosophy) governesses, tutors, and the whole process of nurture and education should be the midwives to assist at the birth of the mature personality. (p. 9)

On one level Hindley might seem reasonable, but he conveniently brushes over the fact that Miles is still a child (his voice has not yet broken, so he has not fully reached puberty). In this light, his sentiments draw upon the rhetoric of paedophiles, presenting their own sexual exploitation of not-yet-sexually-developed children as an essential stage in the children’s own maturing, and thus almost as a selfless act in the child’s own interests. Were Quint merely a metaphor for something within the child themselves, this would not apply, but for Hindley this is clearly not the case; instead he wishes to suggest it is part of an external educative process for Miles:

The term “tutelage” seems the best available. It has the added merit of implying a degree both of personal concern and of authority or control over the young person committed to one’s charge-a form of power which both the Governess and Quint in varying degrees seek to exercise over the boy. Let us then call the music associated with it the ‘”Tutelage” theme. (p. 10)

From this view, the music associated with the Governess’s attempts to protect the children from abuse and exploitation are portrayed by Hindley purely in terms of her own submission to the patriarchal authority of the guardian who has commissioned her (p. 10), when it comes to Quint’s music, Hindley affirms:

If the relationship of tutor or governess may deepen into love, we must now address the question which the partial lifting of taboos in recent years has allowed to feature more prominently in the discussion of this opera-the implicit homosexual relationship between Quint and Miles. No doubt the ban on all forms of homosexual relationships at the time the opera was written would have excluded any direct representation of “the love that dare not speak its name.” But given the inevitable reticence of language, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Mrs.Grose’s description in Act I, Scene 5, points to a sexual relationship. Quint, she says, was “free with everyone, with little Master Miles.” He “liked them pretty,” and “had his will, morning and night. (pp. 10-11 – Hindley is referring to the real non-ghost Quint who had been present in the house before his death and her arrival).

Hindley is sure to be aware of Oscar Wilde’s interpretation, as given in his trial, of Lord Alfred Douglas’s 1894 poem Two Loves, from which the phrase ‘The love that dare not speak its name’ comes:

“The Love that dare not speak its name” in this century is such a great affection of an elder for a younger man as there was between David and Jonathan, such as Plato made the very basis of his philosophy, and such as you find in the sonnets of Michelangelo and Shakespeare. It is that deep, spiritual affection that is as pure as it is perfect. It dictates and pervades great works of art like those of Shakespeare and Michelangelo, and those two letters of mine, such as they are. It is in this century misunderstood, so much misunderstood that it may be described as the “Love that dare not speak its name,” and on account of it I am placed where I am now. It is beautiful, it is fine, it is the noblest form of affection. There is nothing unnatural about it. It is intellectual, and it repeatedly exists between an elder and a younger man, when the elder man has intellect, and the younger man has all the joy, hope and glamour of life before him. That it should be so the world does not understand. The world mocks at it and sometimes puts one in the pillory for it. (cited in the transcript of Wilde’s trial)

What exactly constitutes a ‘young man’ is of course debatable, but the same-sex aspect of such love is not its key attribute, rather the age difference between the participants. Intergenerational sex by no means equates to paedophilia (though research into the former has been used cynically by groups representing the latter – see Veronique Mottier, Sexuality: A Very Short Introduction, (New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 104-106) nor is there any reason to declare it illegitimate when both parties are of an age where they are deemed able to grant sexual consent, but this is clearly not the case in The Turn of the Screw. Hindley goes on to describe this in terms which almost read like a manifesto for sexually abusive teachers:

Whatever textual analysis may yield, for many listeners the matter will be settled by the music given to Quint when he is first heard in the opera. The beauty and yearning of his melismata on the name of Miles betoken love.15 It is equally clear from the music that this love is much more than a rather furtive physical affair. The music is also, of course, a version of the Tutelage theme. The appositeness of this link is seen when it becomes clear (in Quint’s subsequent words) that his relationship with Miles is not just that of a valet or house servant. It is about the opening of magic casements of experience for the boy. We recall that for the ancient Greeks training for adulthood was one of the functions of the socially regulated experience of love between men and boys. As K. J. Dover, probably our most outstanding contemporary authority on ancient Greece, has pointed out, they saw no clear dividing line between the educational and the erotic side of the relationship. (p. 11)

Here Hindley alludes to Kenneth J. Dover’s book Greek Homosexuality (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978), specifically the following passage towards the end of the book:

Erastes and eromenos [the two pederastic roles; the former the older and active partner, the second the younger and more submissive one] clearly found in each other something which they did not find elsewhere. When Plato (Phdr. 255b) said that the eromenos realises that the love offered by his erastes is greater than that of all his family and friends put together, he was speaking of an idealised, ‘philosophical’ eros, and yet he may have been a little closer than he realised to describing the everyday eros which he despised. Indeed, the philosophical paiderastiā which is fundamental to Plato’s expositions in Phaedrus and Symposium is essentially an exaltation, however starved of bodily pleasure, of a consistent Greek tendency to regard homosexual eros as a compound of an educational with a genital relationship. The strength, speed, endurance and masculinity of the eromenos – that is to say, his quality as a potential fighter – were treated (and I offer no opinion on the unexpressed thoughts and feelings of erastai) as the attributes which made him attractive. The Spartans and Cretans went a stage further in professing to have much more regard for qualities of character than for bodily beauty (Ephoros F149; cf Plu. Agis 2.1, on the achievement of Agis, as a lame boy, in becoming the eromenos of Lysander). The erastes was expected to win the love of the eromenos by his value as an exemplar and by the patience, devotion and skill which he displayed in training the eromenos. At Sparta (Plu. Lyc. 22.8) the educational responsibility of the erastes was so interpreted that he bore the blame for a deficiency in courage manifested by his eromenos. ‘Education’ is the key-word in Xenophon’s evaluation of a chaste homosexual relationship (Lac. 2.13, Smp, 8.23), and Spartan terminology (‘breathe into …’, ‘inspire’ [Aelian Varia Historia iii 12, Hesykhios Ɛ 2475] = ‘fall in love with …’, and eispnēlos or eispnēlās [Kallimakhos fr. 68 Pfeiffer, Theokritos 12.13] = ‘breather-into’ = ‘erastes’) points to a notion that the erastes was able to transfer qualities from himself into his eromenos. On growing up, in any Greek community, the eromenos graduated from pupil to friend, and the continuance of an erotic relationship was disapproved, as was such a relationship between coevals. Homosexual relationships are not exhaustively divisible, in Greek society or in any other, into those which perform an educational function and those which provoke and relieve genital tension. Most relationships of any kind are complex, and the need for bodily contact and orgasm was one ingredient of the complex of needs met by homosexual eros. (Dover, pp. 202-203)

One shudders to think what safeguarding and child protection agencies would make of the above. Dover’s immensely influential book, the first major study of both homosexuality and pederasty in Ancient Greece, can be read as a historical study rather than an advocacy, drawing attention to protocols from Ancient Greece crafted to protect boys from any suggestion that the motivation for sexual relations was pleasure, and how it was socially coded as a rite of passage (see David M. Halperin, How to Do the History of Homosexuality (Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 2002), pp. 71-72, 141-143), Hindley takes an affirmative view, also linking the Ancient Greek view presented by Dover to that found in writings of Jeremy Bentham and Edward Carpenter (Hindley, p. 11, n. 16).

Dover’s book was also greatly favoured in a section of Magpie, which presented a ‘PIE Top 20’ (Magpie, Issue No. 14 (Oct.-Dec. 1979), pp. 4-5) of non-fiction books on and about paedophilia, of which Dover’s was one; the only others with a Greek theme were J.Z. Eglington’s Greek Love (New York: Oliver Lawton Press, 1964), which the Magpie writer pointed out argued the case for ‘love’ of pubescent boys, but ultimately came out against it; and Thorkil Vanggard’s Phallos: A Symbol and its History in the Male World (New York: International Universities Press, 1972, originally published in Danish in 1969). Eglinton and Vanggard had appeared in a shorter non-fiction book list (alongside the likes of the Dutch book Sex met Kinderen) in an earlier issue (‘Non-Fiction Book List’, Magpie, Issue No. 4 (June 1977), p. 8), before Dover had been published in 1978), and a further issue had a more extended consideration of Eglinton (‘Review’, Magpie, Issue No. 8 (no date given); reprinted from Gay News, Germany), alongside a detailed examination of a book by Yale professor Parker Rossmann, Sexual Experience Between Men and Boys (New York: Association Press, 1976). But Hindley’s affirmation of Dover’s view resonates strongly with a passage in an essay by the leading Dutch scholar and rights-advocate of paedophilia, Dr. Edward Brongersma, who wrote on multiple occasions for Magpie:

It asks for some psychological discernment to see that – and why – some experiences in this field may be a source of fear and anxiety to one child, while to the other they are something unique, fantastic and delicious. Children who haven’t been brought up in an unhealthy fear of everything sexual, who have had sexual play with comrades, who were not taught to be disgusted by the body and its functions and who don’t have an abnormally weak sexual impulse, will mostly react positively when approached by a sympathetic adult. In more than 50% of the cases they even take the initiative themselves.

Nowadays there are more and more expert authors who have an open eye for the positive effects such an affectionate relation may have. No wonder! Could real love, affection, sympathy, tenderness ever have a bad effect on the evolution of a human being? The ancient Greeks had their wisdom about this and in our present day the official Speijer Commission, appointed by the Dutch government, came to the conclusion that “in a number of cases (heterosexual as well as homosexual) initiation by an adult may result in a better evolution of the boy or girl concerned”. The German scientist Prof. Schlegel advances the opinion that sexual contacts with an adult may be as necessary at puberty as maternal love and tenderness in the first period of life. Mature sexual behaviour has to be learned by children’s sexual play as many ethnological researches show. If our society had better understanding of this, our adolescents would enjoy more sexual liberty and be less tempted to aggressive behaviour. (Dr. Edward Brongersma, ‘Paedophilia: The Effects’, Magpie, Issue No. 11 (May 1978), p. 5. It is worth noting how Hindley himself looked very positively at the findings of the Speijer Commission in his ‘The age of consent for male homosexuals’).

The wisdom of the Ancient Greeks could as well be used to legitimise slavery as paedophilia; more importantly, such allusions give such practices a mythical aura such as can be appealing to those purportedly of ‘taste’ rooted in antiquity (a view which permeates Germaine Greer’s odious pederastic book The Boy (London: Thames and Hudson, 2003)), to which is added the view that this is in the interests of the child, not the adult exploiting them. It is clear when Hindley writes that ‘Quint has already progressed to a warmth of love which the Governess only begins to approach in the course of the opera’ (p. 12) and that ‘Quint is not a monster but one who opens fascinating new opportunities to the imaginative boy’ (p. 15) where his sympathies lie. And in one footnote, Hindley’s real sympathies become abundantly clear:

In considering this relationship [between Miles and Quint] it should be remembered that (for reasons unexplained in the opera) Miles is without father or mother, and, although materially well provided for, he has been virtually abandoned by his only relative-his uncle and guardian. This kind of emotional deprivation is akin to that of a number of the boys described in recent case studies, where it has been found that in some circumstances sexual relationships between men and boys can be gentle, positive, and supportive, with no self-evident negative consequences. Cf. Theo Sandfort, The Sexual Aspect of Paedophile Relations (Amsterdam 1982); G. D. Wilson and D. N. Cox, The Child Lovers: A Study of Paedophiles in Society (London 1983). (pp. 15-16, n. 21)

(Wilson and Cox’s study was a serious piece of psychological scholarship based upon a sample of volunteers all from PIE, conducted with the aid of Tom O’Carroll)

Compare this to the following by Father Michael Ingram, convicted sex offender and regular contributor to Magpie:

What seems to have happened was that the boy was rather deprived of affection from his parents who were cold and undemonstrative. He had often allowed the man to cuddle him, and this sometimes led to the man feeling him inside his trousers. If one can make a strong attempt to mask the disgust this might evoke, and consider the possible damage done to the boy by being starved of love at home, by enduring the anger, fearful interrogation, and most of all by submitting to the formal repetition by the doctor of the acts which were causing all the trouble, one can see that the offender was the last one from who the boy needed protection. (The Rev Fr Michael Ingram, O.P. ‘”Filthy”’, reprinted from Libertarian Education, in Magpie, Issue No. 5 (July, 1977) pp. 5-6.

Or the following description of a cover picture in Magpie, saying it:

‘….is of a 12 year old boy full of joy and happiness despite being form a home where is own mother didn’t know his correct age, and where his father is a thief and a drunkard. This picture of inner peace was made just weeks before the police brutally interrogated him, jailed his benefactor and returned him to the “custody of his parents” with a statement that he “requires psychiatric counselling”.’ (Magpie, Issue No. 10 (no date), p. 12).

Around the same time as examining The Turn of the Screw, Hindley wrote the first of two articles on Britten’s last opera Death in Venice (Hindley, ‘Contemplation and Reality: A Study in Britten’s ‘Death in Venice’’, Music and Letters, Vol. 71, No. 4 (Nov., 1990), pp. 511-523). That Mann’s 1912 novel Der Tod in Venedig deals with the frustrated and ultimately destructive erotic lusting after a boy of around fourteen by a much older man, is not in doubt, whilst the novel’s own references to the ideas of Plato have long been explored by critics. As elsewhere, Hindley is rightly concerned to look at the transmogrification of Mann’s original through its being transformed by the librettist (again Piper) and composer. From the outset, his sympathies are again clear, writing that an analysis of the changes:

suggests that Britten intended to show not only the obsession which destroyed Aschenbach but also the positive possibility of a sublimated love of youthful male beauty along the lines of the Platonic philosophy, a theme which in Mann is treated with the utmost ambivalence. In brief, what in Mann is represented, almost unquestioningly, as progressive self-abandonment to an obsession is transformed in the opera into a double movement, towards and away from a positive realization of the Platonic ideal. (pp. 511-512)

Hindley achieves this by playing up the significance of the Greek allusions, in particular the scene featuring the Games of Apollo, ‘a pinnacle of idealism’ in Britten/Piper, rather than ‘the beginning of a decline’ in Mann (p. 512), and a much more straightforward identification of the sun with Apollo and then with Tadzio in Britten/Piper (‘No boy, but Phoebus of the golden hair/Driving his horses through the azure sky/Mounting his living chariot shoulder high/Both child and god he lords it in the air’) (pp. 512-514). As he would do four years later in his second essay on Billy Budd discussed above, Hindley links the use of a Lydian inflection to the earlier Young Apollo, and evokes another of Britten’s Hölderlin settings, this time to the poem ‘Die Jugend’ (the fourth of the Sechs Hölderlin-Fragmente) and its imagery of the sun as ‘Father Helios’ (Hindley, p. 514).

In terms of Britten and Piper’s rendition of those Platonic ideas which Hindley claims are ambivalent, hesitant and ambiguous in Mann (pp. 514-515), Hindley is once again unequivocally affirmative:

None of these hesitations and ambiguities are found in the treatment of the Platonic philosophy in the opera. On the contrary, the closing scene of Act I is a remarkably lucid exposition of the Platonic teaching on beauty and boy-love, surely intended to affirm an artistic credo, or, at the least, to present a serious option for Aschenbach. The basis of the symbolism here is set out in a letter from Myfanwy Piper to Britten dated 28 January 1972, in which she wrote: ‘There is no doubt in my mind that Aschenbach was a devotee of Apollo -that Apollo is the God whom he puts up against Dionysus and that Tadzio therefore also can and does represent Apollo in his mind . ’20 It is but a short step to using the Apollo/Tadzio symbolism as a means of presenting Platonic idealism on stage, in terms of music, voice and dance. While there is something in the criticism that the dances are overlong, they (and this whole scene) are no mere extraneous divertissement, but an essential part of the philosophical development. In response to the Voice of Apollo they present the doctrine that the Divine is manifest in a perfect human form. There is no hint of ambiguity (still less, covert sexual desire) in the Chorus’s declaration, commenting on the action in the manner of the chorus of ancient Greek drama:

Beauty is the only form
Of spirit that our eyes can see
So brings to the outcast soul
Reflections of divinity.

The thought is reaffirmed at the conclusion of the Games (‘Beauty is the mirror of spirit’), at which point Apollo demonstrates his identification with the boy’s beauty by taking over his theme. (pp. 515-516)

Hindley links this to a wider interest in Plato’s writings on male love amongst literary homosexual circles in England of which Britten and Pears were part, as well as the setting of Hölderlin’s Sokrates und Alkibiades mentioned before. But nowhere does he distinguish between love for an adult, or at least one who has reached an age of sexual maturity, and that for a child. On the contrary:

When the Voice of Apollo sings ‘He who loves beauty worships me . . .’, the opera invites us to see this new experience, mediated through Tadzio, as the culmination of Aschenbach’s artistic quest, the quest of one who in his maturity had built his art on simplicity, beauty, form, and one who ‘strives to create beauty’. But what is the next step? For Plato, it is to commune with the beautiful beloved in a relationship which will ‘beget spiritual children’-‘virtues and qualities and actions which mark a good man’ (p. 516, citing the Symposium).

Hindley also locates some text omitted from the final version of the libretto, from the reflection on artistic inspiration following the Games: ‘When genius leaves contemplation for one moment of reality/[When the flower is fruited, the child of body and mind…]/Then Eros is in the word’ (passage in square brackets omitted), and argues for a Platonic interpretation of these as ‘the engendering of ‘spiritual’ children (whether moral virtue or high art) through devoted association with a beautiful youth’, again in contrast to Mann, where they are associated with debauchery (pp. 520-521). And as in his interpretation of the Screw, Hindley maintains that when the Lady of the Pearls attempts to protect her son from Aschenbach, ‘she embodies the reaction of conventional society whose hostility to even a ‘Platonic’ and sublimated relationship Aschenbach, the famous writer, could not openly defy’, so that ‘she (and through her, society) must share in the responsibility for deflecting Aschenbach from a potentially ideal relationship which could have brought him fulfilment as an artist and as a man’ (p. 522). Actually, such a relationship might be just as likely to earn Aschenbach a prison sentence, and Tadzio a lifetime of bitterness, estrangement and self-hatred for allowing himself to be the victim, no matter Hindley’s implication (somewhat in the manner of Brongersma above) that through his smile at Aschenbach he is the agent of desire to which Aschenbach finds himself unable to do other than submit. If as Hindley argues, in Mann ‘any concern for the youth other than as an occasion for the artist’s self-expression is explicitly repudiated’ (p. 523), in the opera he sees ‘an affirmative vision of Platonism as a genuine option for the artist, developed and amplified by an emphasis on the significance of a real relationship with the beloved for the artist himself’, so that ‘Refusal of that ideal … leads to introverted sterility and degradation’ (ibid). Not only is pederasty to be celebrated, according to Hindley, but not to act upon it is to be met with patronising derision.

In a second article on the opera from two years later (Hindley, ‘Platonic Elements in Britten’s ‘Death in Venice’, Music and Letters, Vol. 73, No. 3 (Aug., 1992), pp. 407-429), Hindley looks more deeply at the roots of the opera in Plato’s Phaedrus and Symposium, presenting clearly his view of Plato’s teaching on eros and beauty as follows:

The visible beauty of this world (particularly the beauty of a lovely youth) is a manifestation (in a myriad particular exemplars) of the eternal essence of Beauty, which in Plato’s thought is identical with the Form of the Good or ultimate reality. What moves men to respond to this beauty and share in this vision is eros or ‘love’, but Plato also taught that in its highest manifestation such love of beauty stops short of physical love-making, expressing itself rather in a communion of contemplation with the beloved and the begetting of ‘spiritual children’ such as wisdom and virtue. It is Plato’s later interpreters who applied this teaching to the work of the creative artist, who in creating beauty mediates an experience of the transcendent or, as others would express it, ‘the divine’. (pp. 407-408)

To Hindley, the first act of Britten’s Death in Venice is a presentation of this philosophy in terms of Aschenbach’s relationship to Tadzio, and the second demonstrates the destructive consequences of failing to act upon it (p. 408), in contrast to the view of Mann, in which the destruction is a result of occasioning upon this way of thinking in the first place. And the passage of Hindley above goes as far as to interpret Plato’s own interpreters (he cites R.C. Cross and A.D. Woozley, Plato’s Republic: a Philosophical Commentary (London: Macmillan, 1956) and W.K.C. Guthrie’s History of Greek Philosophy. 4: Plato: the man and his dialogues, earlier period (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975)) as implying that artistic creation amounts to a displaced pederasty. Throughout this essay (which contains a good deal of astute musical observations) the boy Tadzio is presented by Hindley as the embodiment of some transcendent beauty as well as an object of sexual desire, a Platonic ideal who is nonetheless viewed in utterly eroticised terms. If the pederastic themes are disguised in a somewhat high-flown philosophical, mythological and musical language by Hindley, there are no less palpable as a result, any more than in the ongoing theme of Platonic ‘sublimation’ which Hindley identifies in the opera and relates to Britten’s own biography (pp. 422-423). But this latter is something Hindley may regret in Britten:

In fact we are dealing with relationships between males, and that not in ancient Greece but in near-contemporary society. Even after the partial decriminalization of homosexual acts in England in 1967 it was difficult (particularly for those brought up under the previous era of repression) to advance such thoughts. If Britten had wished to advance them, he would undeniably have felt inhibited by the social pressures which dictated that such things should not be spoken of. Or was it that he was tortured by the tension between a commitment to the ideal of ‘sublimation’ and the urgent (but resisted) desire for a physical consummation? Could he have allowed himself to wonder, whatever his own rule of life may have been, whether to follow the normal Greek route of love for an adolescent boy might, in Aschenbach’s case, have yielded more for the artist than the austere path laid down by Plato? In either case, we would have an explanation both of the late appearance of the thought ‘The flower is fruited’ in the composition process and the decision to abandon it. (p. 423)

Britten did realise same-sex physical consummation (at least as far as is believed by his biographers) through his relationship with Pears, despite the repressive climate for the majority of his life which made such consummation illegal. To bemoan this repressive situation is more than legitimate, and would be in line with the reflections of many other commentators; but Hindley is going a stage much further in lashing out against the ‘social pressures’ which specifically forbade (and rightly continue to forbid) that such consummation could be achieved with an adolescent boy.

Hindley’s other Britten essays deal with operas in which such themes are less obvious, though. Since the appearance of Philip Brett’s article ‘Britten and Grimes’ (The Musical Times, Vol. 118, No. 1618 (Dec., 1977), pp. 995-1000, reproduced in Brett (ed), Benjamin Britten: Peter Grimes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), pp. 180-189), many commentators have interpreted the ostracisation of Grimes by the inhabitants of his village as a metaphor for societal estrangement of homosexuals. As Hindley himself points out in an essay partially devoted to this opera (Hindley, ‘Homosexual Self-Affirmation and Self-Oppression in Two Britten Operas’, The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 76, No. 2 (Summer 1992), pp. 143-168), Brett went on to examine how earlier drafts for the opera made the theme of the love of Grimes for his boy apprentice explicit, only to be suppressed in later versions (Brett, ‘’Fiery visions’ (and revisions): Peter Grimes in progress’, in Brett (ed), Peter Grimes, pp. 47-87) , as pointed out by Hindley. Had they remained explicit, the opera would likely have been a much more contentious work both at the time of its premiere in 1945 and perhaps equally if not more so today (as some aspects of exploitation of child labour are deemed less acceptable, and awareness has heightened of child abuse). But Hindley is concerned to show how clues to a ‘specifically intergenerational homoeroticism’ (p. 143) can be found in the final work as it stands. The Grimes of George Crabbe’s original poem was a cruel exploiter of child labour, probably the murderer of the first apprentice, but Hindley argues that the Grimes of the opera is quite different; he is ‘innocent of that charge’ of murder of the first boy, to Hindley, on the grounds of the coroner’s acquittal (a remarkable statement of Hindley’s faith in the judicial process), whilst ‘the subsequent scenes of hallucination and even madness effectively exonerate him’ because ‘They carry the stamp of authenticity when Peter recalls his agony at having witnessed two deaths which he was powerless to prevent’ (p. 144). Even the most obvious indication of Grimes’s brutality, the bruise found by Ellen Orford on the second boy’s neck near the beginning of Act 2, to Hindley shows that ‘Grimes has a callous harshness, no doubt exacerbated by his ostracism from society, but such a temper falls short of sadistic cruelty’ (ibid). At all costs Hindley is concerned to defend Grimes, with callous disregard for the welfare of the boy (I would personally argue that the supposedly saintly character of Ellen is actually the primary villainess of the opera, as she is the only one of the townspeople actively to volunteer to help Grimes procure more child labour, and her aria to the boy upon discovering the bruise, ‘Child, you’re not too young to know’, and attempts to diminish the significance of his own physical ordeals compared to her affairs of the heart – the boy’s bruise serves mostly as an obstacle on the road towards her own dreams of union with Grimes – demonstrating self-serving hypocrisy, but that is for another article).

Hindley mentions a reference in an earlier draft of the libretto to a ‘nine-tailed cat’, about which Grimes says to the boy in the hut ‘Will you move/If the cat starts making love?’, a clear indication of sadism (p. 144), but as this was removed, the clear evidence for the Borough’s suspicions is apparently absent (that questions about what really happened with the first boy might be more than idle gossip is not countenanced by Hindley as a possibility). So Hindley looks to establish that Grimes as ostracised homosexual outsider is not merely a metaphorical or allegorical interpretation of the work, but a way of viewing its actuality. From Ellen’s Act 1 aria ‘Let her among you without fault cast the first stone’, relating to the biblical story of a woman taken in adultery, Hindley reads that Ellen is implicitly accusing the other villagers themselves of sexual misdemeanours (rather than her using a well-known phrase out of its original biblical context, which seems entirely reasonable), referencing the promiscuous urges of Ned Keene and Bob Boles (when drunk), the flirtatious nature of the nieces, and for that matter Mrs Sedley’s addiction to laudanum. The chant of the congregation, just out of the church, in Act 2, ‘Grimes is at his exercise’, is ominous in Crabbe’s poem (‘None put the question, – “Peter, dost thou give / The boy his food? – What, man! the lad must live / Consider, Peter, let the child have bread, / He’ll serve the better if he’s stroked and fed.” / None reason’d thus – and some, on hearing cries, / Said calmly, “Grimes is at his exercise.” // Pinn’d, beaten, cold, pinch’d, threaten’d, and abused – / His efforts punish’d and his food refused, – / Awake tormented, – soon aroused from sleep, – / Struck if he wept, and yet compell’d to weep, / The trembling boy dropp’d down and strove to pray, / Received a blow, and trembling turn’d away, / Or sobb’d and hid his piteous face; – while he, / The savage master, grinn’d in horrid glee: / He’d now the power he ever loved to show, / A feeling being subject to his blow’). In the opera, however, Hindley interprets the fact that this is a canon based upon the last line sung by Grimes before exiting as indicating that ‘Grimes’s fault, whatever it was, is to be seen as on a level with the failings of the rest of the Borough’ (p. 145, citing the setting of the phrase ‘Each one’s at his exercise’). But that very last line came right after Grimes physically hit Ellen, the woman who loves him, and Hindley is able to make light of both domestic violence and child sexual abuse in one foul swoop. For Brett, the break with Ellen at this moment ‘is only symbolic of his [Grimes’s] final capitulation to the values and judgment of society at large’ (Brett, ‘Britten and Grimes’, p. 997). For Hindley, however:

I differ with Brett concerning the point at which self-oppression begins its corrosive work in Grimes’s personality. It seems to me that at the moment of climax, when he cries “So be it, and God have mercy upon me,” Grimes is not abasing himself before the Borough, but is defiantly affirming his right to go his own way. It is only later that he succumbs to the unremitting campaign of ostracism and unfounded accusations, and buckles under the strain to the point of suicide. […]
The cause of the rupture between Peter and Ellen is her conclusion that he can never succeed in his proposed program of rehabilitation [in terms of becoming rich through fishing, and achieving bourgeois respectability that way, as discussed earlier by Hindley]. In considering his violent response, we must be aware of the psychological tension behind it. The one person to whom Peter had looked for help has repudiated him. As if to underscore Ellen’s words, the congregation sings “Amen,” and Peter, picking up their affirmation, declares “So be it! And God have mercy upon me.” Practically everything conspires to emphasize the climactic nature of this utterance. In particular, the music prepares for it by a reiterated pedal of 28 measures on F for the horns (Figs. 16-17), against which Ellen and Peter exchange words in a tonally ambivalent manner. Peter’s expostulations are in B-flat minor, and at the climax the role of the pedal F as a dominant is clarified by the cadence to B-flat major in which Peter’s words are set (Ex. 3). This phrase is then repeated (in diminution) by the orchestra to set off the extended chorus, which is dominated by the words “Grimes is at his exercise.” [….]

[On the omission of a stage direction ‘The boy screams’, after Grimes hits Ellen, from an earlier version of the libretto, followed by Grimes saying ‘Now we’ll see, young stranger, come / Where the road leads. Young stranger home’:]
The sequence of changes, however, suggests three inferences: (1) that Britten wished to avoid the original suggestion of “La” that the resolution of Grimes’s problems might lie in defiantly setting up an open relationship with the boy; (2) that the composer required, instead, some decisive verbal formula to match the musical climax denoted by the resolution of the reiterated pedal on F, referred to above; and (3) that the implications of the first suggestion (“To hell then”) were unsatisfactory. (pp. 147-148)

It should not be too difficult to arrive at a straightforward explanation for this scene: a frustrated Grimes lashes out violently at someone closest to him, who is also physically weaker, the townspeople are horrified, picking up on his final utterance in a cattish manner (perhaps also motivated by more abstract musical requirements for Britten), but continue to distrust Ellen herself for continuing to stand by a man who is violent towards both the woman who loves him and also the boy who has been entrusted to him. But this does not suit the twisted world-view of a Hindley: Grimes is presented as isolated through no fault of his own, driven to violence by abandonment by Ellen (who does not abandon him, simply loses faith in his mission) in a manner which comes close to blaming her for bringing the violence upon herself, but the road to true fulfilment is through the ‘open relationship with the boy’ which Britten ultimately shied away from including explicitly. Partner violence and the sexual abuse of children are both equally legitimised. The only character for whom Hindley shows any regard is Grimes himself; all the others (including the boys) are there to be despised as representatives of the much-detested society around or simply there to serve him.

Hindley’s two writings on Xenophon (Hindley, ‘Eros and Military Command in Xenophon’, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 2 (1994), pp. 347-366, and ‘Xenophon on Male Love’, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 49, No. 1 (1999), pp. 74-99) focused upon the relatively small sub-section of Xenophon’s work dealing with eroticism and love, draw further upon ideas from Dover’s work. Here once again he misses no opportunity to dwell upon pederastic themes:

[A]s Sir Kenneth Dover has pointed out, the story of Episthenes in Xenophon’s Anabasis reflects the same belief in stiffening a fighting force with the powerful bonds of erōs. The historian himself, it will be remembered, intervened on behalf of this lover of boys and the young man he was seeking to save from execution, and spoke to Seuthes, the local ruler in whose service he then was, sympathetically of the company of fighting youths whom Episthenes had raised, chosen on the basis of their good looks. (‘Eros and Military Command’, p. 347)

Vice offers a life of pleasure, in which Herakles need not concern himself with weighty matters of war and public affairs, but may plan his life around the choice of whatever will delight him by way of the senses, including the love of boys. Nor need he be too scrupulous about the means employed to attain these ends. (ibid. p. 348)

For Xenophon the need for self-control and the perils of enslavement to bodily pleasure (above all, sex) are particularly important in those who exercise any kind of authority. Even when it comes to appointing a farm bailiff, he suggests, one should avoid a man who is excessively in love, because concern with his boy lover (paidika) may interfere with the punctilious performance of his duties.” Not surprisingly, then, the virtue of self-control is seen as essential for those who exercise military command. (ibid. p. 349)

The phrase [a Greek phrase which Hindley translates as ‘a very fine young fellow’] commonly denotes moral worthiness and is used by Xenophon as a term of general approbation, applicable as well to a slave as to a general. One wonders however whether its application to a youth who has no part to play except as an associate of Alketas, does not bring to the surface an underlying aesthetic reference, in a way which elsewhere requires further specification. In this sense, Rex Warner translates, ‘He was a fine attractive boy.’ However that may be, Xenophon’s narrative seems clearly to imply that the Spartan commander’s neglect of his duties in pursuit of this boy had resulted in a significant military reverse. (ibid. p. 350)

Hindley goes on to suggest that the Greek term λακωυίξειυ, sometimes used to indicate unambiguously taking the Spartan side in a political sense, or to speaking the language concerned or with a certain accent , could be ‘used without further specification – in its reference to pederasty’ (p. 353). This he does by further extensive reference to Dover (who also suggested it could have meant ‘to have analy intercourse, irrespective of the sex of the person penetrated’), taking up the bulk of the article (pp. 353-362). Not being a classical scholar, I am not in a position to judge the veracity or otherwise of Hindley’s arguments; suffice to say that this is clearly the primary motivation behind his interest in Xenophon, which he can then trace in terms of the accounts depicted. In his second Xenophon article, Hindley turns to the theme of pederasty on the first page, in order to address the belief (as apparently presented in Eva Cantarella, Bisexuality in the Ancient World (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992) and Bruce S. Thornton, Eros: The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1997)) that ‘there has been a tendency to regard Xenophon as opposed to pederasty (or at least its physical expression outright’ (Hindley, ‘Xenophon on Male Love’, p. 74). Hindley portrays Xenophon as belonging to ‘the upper-class gentry [in Athenian society] who, while not aspiring to the heights of Platonic philosophy, might be prepared to think about their relationships with boys’ (ibid), and considers how Xenophon was aware of different views on pederasty within various Greek traditions, before going on to consider how the Greek historian’s editorial comments serve as reflections upon the formal discussions of pederasty which he attributes to others in his writings. There can be no doubting the thoroughness of Hindley’s application to this task; once again, whilst unqualified to remark in more detail upon his exegesis (unlike with Hindley’s musicological work), the obsessiveness of this theme is unmistakable to any reader, its erudition and continual eliding of the boundaries between plain same-sex and pederastic desire (or simply subsuming the former into the latter) in no way mitigating from the sordid and exploitative nature of the philosophy upon which he lavishes attention. He summarises one passage from Xenophon’s Memorabilia (1.3.8-15) as follows:

(a) Xenophon acknowledges homosexual desire in himself (a not surprising fact, but a not unimportant one either).
(b) he challenges Sokrates’ rigorist view on grounds of common sense.
(c) he acknowledges circumstances (though circumscribed) in which the physical expression of sex with boys may be accepted by the mind without harmful consequences. It is for the individual ψυχή to regulate these matters.
(d) while Sokrates’ practice of abstinence is to be admired, it may be questioned whether this rule is to be made universal, since even the master allowed some relaxation.
(p. 85)

Xenophon’s character Kritobouls is ‘a willing pupil of Sokrates’ but ‘The one point at which he seems to resist Sokrates’ teaching is over his associations with young men’ (p. 85). Elsewhere, Hindley loves to find every reference to ‘boy-love’, and concludes that as ‘self-control is not to be identified with celibacy’, Xenophon’s retention of Sokrates sacrificing of the pleasures of the body towards those of the mind were mostly in order to defend his teacher from charges of ‘corrupting the young’ (p. 98), concluding:

What I hope I have demonstrated, however, is an interest on his part in right sexual relationships between older and younger men and boys, and the articulation of a viewpoint, if not a theory, on this subject which stands in tension (and, by the time of the Hiero self-conscious tension) with Sokrates’ absolutist rejection of all genital relations between males. It may be termed a way of moderation. It embraces love of body and love of mind, in which the older respects the younger partner and what he offers. It maintains self-discipline over physical expression without denying the latter its place, and finds pleasure in a freely given (sexual) love as an ingredient in friendship. (pp. 98-99).

And in a further essay on Ancient Greece (‘Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens’, Past & Present, No. 133 (Nov., 1991), pp. 167-183), Hindley continues the same themes with reference to Dover’s work:

Initial doubts are prompted by two passages which clearly imply that there was no law against intercourse between citizens and free-born boys. In the oft-quoted speech of Pausanias from Plato’s Symposium, the speaker, while advocating the love of older youths, says that “There ought to be a law forbidding love of young boys, to avoid expending a great deal of trouble on an uncertain venture”. The argument is of course jocular, but it would make no sense at all if everyone knew that the law did in fact forbid intercourse of this kind. The same conclusion follows from Aeschines’ statement that, while the lawgiver prohibited a slave from loving a free-born boy, “he did not prevent the free man from loving, associating with and following [a boy]”.

May, however, a closer study of the law of hubris, particularly as regards the “shame” involved in pederasty, require us to override these apparently clear statements? Recent studies agree that when applied to law, the term hubris is to be understood in its everyday usage. But this involves an enormous range of meaning: for example, eating and drinking in an excessive or disorderly manner; fighting and doing physical harm to people; depriving someone of his possessions or rights; or the unrestrained use of personal power by a tyrant. The list will also include sexual violation, but this is only one among many applications, and it is going too far to assert that the words hubris and hubrizein “have a strong sexual connotation”. (pp. 168-169)

No doubt in a general sense the hubris law did protect children – by prohibiting forcible interference with them. But to interpret the summarizing function of this law more widely would conflict with Aeschines’ statement that the law does not forbid a free man to love a boy, and with the orator’s own acceptance that he himself was erōtikos – a lover of boys. (p. 177)

While therefore younger boys are not excluded, there are sufficient instances of older erōmenoi to rule out any argument based on the essentially “feminine” characteristics of pre-pubertal boys, inability to ejaculate, lack of testicles and so forth. Similar considerations preclude the application of arguments about the “shame” of yielding to an erastēs based on the chaperonage rules to the whole range of pederastic relationships. While the evidence suggests that there was no “age of consent” below which intercourse was per se unlawful, one might well speak of an “age of protection” which the rules regulating opening hours for schools and gymnasia and the custom of oversight by a paidagōgos were designed to maintain. (p. 179)

This far from exhaustive account of Hindley’s writings in retirement should leave no doubt as to what a central role pederasty played in much of his thought. Beneath a scholarly and deeply learned exterior, steeped in antiquity, lies an obsessiveness and distorted morality which is not so different to that to be found in the more obviously explicit writings to be found in Magpie and other paedophile publications. I do not believe we should censor Hindley’s work, by any means, nor that it is without worth. But if the allegations about his having facilitated government financial support for one of the most insidious of all paedophile organisations – members of which have been linked to child pornography and abuse rings and international networks, ritual exploitation of those in children’s homes, and a whole host of cases of sexual predation upon very young boys in other institutions – are proved correct, as looks likely, then Hindley’s scholarly legacy should be afforded a good deal more critical treatment than has hitherto been the case. And above all, in no sense should Hindley’s work be seen as representative of wider gay-focused studies and scholarship. There is no more intrinsic link between same-sex desire and paedophilia as there is for opposite-sex desire; both remain minority inclinations belonging to those in desperate need of help before they do untold damage. It is to Hindley’s discredit that he attempted to dissolve such distinctions, and legitimise paedophilia as the most natural representation of same-sex desire, in exactly the manner in which paedophile groups appropriated the language and rhetoric of gay rights to suit their own twisted ends.

Articles by Clifford Hindley

(some articles were published as ‘J.C. Hindley’, ‘The Rev. J.C. Hindley’ or ‘J. Clifford Hindley’)

‘The Philosophy of Enthusiasm’, The London Quarterly and Holborn Review No. 182 (April and July 1957), pp. 99-109, 199-210.

‘The seal and the first instalment’, Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 9, No. 3 (July-Sep., 1960), pp. 108-119.

‘The translation of words for “covenant”’, Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 10, No. 1 (Jan.-Mar., 1961), pp. 13-24.

‘Serampore and the Future’, in The Story of Serampore and its College (Serampore: COuncil of Serampore College, 1961), pp. 102-108.

‘The meaning and translation of covenant’, Bible Translator, Vol. 13, No.2 (April 1962), pp. 90-101.

‘A prophet outside Israel: Thoughts on the study of Zoroastrianism’, Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 11, No. 3 (July-Sep., 1962), pp. 96-107.

‘Honest to Robinson’, Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 13, No. 1 (1964), pp. 2-10.

‘Witness in the Fourth Gospel’, Scottish Journal of Theology, Vol. 18, No. 3 (Sep., 1965), pp. 319-337.

‘History and Rudolf Bultmann’, Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 14, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec., 1965), pp. 193-208.

‘The Christ of creation in New Testament theology’, Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 15, No. 3 (July-Sep., 1966), pp. 89-105.

‘The Son of Man: a recent analysis’, Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 15, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec., 1966, pp. 172-178.

‘Der historische Jesus in indischer Sicht’, in Indische Beiträge zur Theologie der Gegenwart, ed Horst Bürkle and Wolfgang M.W. Roth (Stuttgart: Evangelisches Verlagswerk, 1966), pp. 23-58

‘The Mediator of a New Covenant’, Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Jan.-June, 1967), pp. 121-136.

‘The resurrection in recent Western theology’, Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (April-June, 1968), pp. 71-88.

‘Toward a Date for the Similitudes of Enoch: An Historical Approach’, New Testament Studies 14 (1968), pp. 551-565.

‘The Jesus of History: An Appraisal from India’, in Indian Voices in Today’s Theological Debate, edited Horst Buckle and Wolfgang M.W. Roth, English Edition (Delhi: Lucknow Publishing House, 1972).

‘The Age of Consent for Male Homosexuals’, Criminal Law Review 595-603 (1986).

‘Love and Salvation in Britten’s ‘Billy Budd’, Music & Letters, Vol. 70, No. 3 (Aug., 1989), pp. 363-381.

‘Why Does Miles Die? A Study of Britten’s “The Turn of the Screw”’, The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 74, No. 1 (1990), pp. 1-17.

‘Contemplation and Reality: A Study in Britten’s ‘Death in Venice’’, Music and Letters, Vol. 71, No. 4 (Nov., 1990), pp. 511-523.

‘Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens’, Past & Present, No. 133 (Nov., 1991), pp. 167-183.

‘Homosexual Self-Affirmation and Self-Oppression in Two Britten Operas’, The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 76, No. 2 (Summer 1992), pp. 143-168.

‘Platonic Elements in Britten’s ‘Death in Venice’, Music and Letters, Vol. 73, No. 3 (Aug., 1992), pp. 407-429.

‘Britten’s “Billy Budd”: The “Interview Chords” Again’, The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 78, No. 1 (Spring, 1994), pp. 99-126.

‘Not the Marrying Kind: Britten’s “Albert Herring”’, Cambridge Opera Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2 (Jul., 1994), pp. 159-174.

‘Eros and Military Command in Xenophon’, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 2 (1994), pp. 347-366.

‘Britten, Auden and Johnny Inkslinger’, Perversions, ii (1994), pp. 42-56.

‘Britten’s Parable Art: A Gay Reading’, History Workshop Journal, No. 40 (Autumn, 1995), pp. 62-90.

Review of William H.L. Godsalve, ‘Britten’s ‘A Midsummer Night’s Dream’: Making an Opera from Shakespeare’s Comedy’, Music & Letters, Vol. 77, No. 2 (May, 1996), pp. 299-300.

‘Xenophon on Male Love’, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 49, No. 1 (1999), pp. 74-99.

‘Eros in life and death: Billy Budd and Death in Venice’, in The Cambridge Companion to Benjamin Britten, edited Mervyn Cooke (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 147-166.

Entries on Achilles, Aeschines, Agathon (and Pausanias) Alexander the Great, Aristophanes, Ganymede, Harmodius and Aristogiton, Socrates, Theocritus in Who’s Who in Gay and Lesbian History: From Antiquity to World War Two, edited Robert Aldrich and Garry Wotherspoon (London and New York: Routledge, 2001), pp. 1-2, 8-11, 15-16, 27-28, 174-175, 201-202, 408-410, 438-440.

‘Sappho’s ‘Rosy’ Moon’, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 52, No. 1 (2002), pp. 374-377.

‘Sophron Eros: Xenophon’s Ethical Erotics’, in Xenophon and his World: Papers from a Conference Held in Liverpool in July 1999, edited Christopher Tuplin (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2004), pp. 125-146.