Grenfell and the LRB

On of the (many) joys of retirement is the freedom to pursue your own obsessions. Way back in 2018, I wrote a critical commentary on Andrew O’Hagan’s account of Grenfell in the LRB. “Account” is mild - it was a 60,000 word effort, which included graphic descriptions, historical analysis and lots of individual interviews. It also made some controversial judgements which I disputed. O’Hagan thought that the council leaders were motivated by concern for the tenants, and had been unfairly condemned. The local activists, in his eyes, were passionate but misguided, prevented by political bias from constructive negotiation. There’s a lot that’s emerged over the last three years and I could be biased, but I’d say that the vast majority of that evidence supports my side of the case rather than his. In September 2021, for instance, Channel 4 showed footage of a meeting between the council and some tenants, which is dynamite.

But it’s not just about him and me. It’s also about the LRB, this magazine which sees itself as a dominant force in European culture, but which in my view has abdicated all editorial responsibility for a series of journalistic misjudgements which have slandered local citizens and obscured discussion of a significant event. I’ve tried many times and many ways to get the LRB to discuss these issues, but they don’t want to know. If you want to see where I’ve got to, my latest effort on this topic is “the Grenfell Story and the London Review of Books”, on my website at www.paulfranciswrites.co.uk