New book by David Worlock. Pre-order now at Marble Hill Publishers or Amazon.

A small Cotswold farm is the setting for a classic struggle of wills. Robert Worlock, eccentric and demanding, resolutely maintains the old ways, determined above all to make his son into a farmer fit to take over the family acres. His son, David, is equally determined not to be bullied into something he neither wants nor likes. His childhood becomes a battleground: can he find a way to make his father love him without denying his right to determine his own life?

 

Something should be celebrated. We live in a society that often likes to beat itself up: we condemn our fellows as unfeeling, unsympathetic, unresponsive. our newsfeeds tell us that just when we do not believe mankind cannot behave worse then our fellow men prove that they can . Yet my own experience is exactly the opposite. I call it “crowd surfing “

This is how it feels. Every week I go to London from my home 40 miles away in the English  countryside. Taxi, train, taxi. A practiced route and a well established routine eases the burden on a man in his 80th year with two metallic knees, and using two sticks to maintain security for his onward progress given the loss of 60% of his eyesight. That eyesight loss at first deterred truffle but now, given that I do not wish to dropout of the circle of friends that I cherish or the working life that is very important to me, I crowd surf – I leap from a high place, metaphorically, and hope that if things go wrong then someone will help to break my fall.

People are kind. They regularly offer me seats, offer help on and off trains, and, if asked, willingly read the signage and directions that I can no longer manage. Some days I need that help more than on others. Last Thursday was a classic. Heading for the eye clinic in central London, I had not been on the train for more than a few minutes when an announcement told me that a signal failure further up the line had closed the mainline station that I was heading towards. We were all going to get off at West.Ruislip. Where? I’m sure that this is a community of distinguished and generous people, but it is not, I must confess, an area with which I have any familiarity. It is however a station on the Central underground railway line. After some confusion (I had not realised it was the last station on that line and was at pains to find out which direction I should be going in when there was in fact only one direction) we got underway. We reached  Marble Arch, a station where I knew I could find a taxi adjacent to the large hotel at street level. And there my troubles began.

In the first instance there was an escalator to the surface. I used to leap aboard such things with gay abandon. Now, the fact that I could not see where the step began , the fact that the step seemed to move very quickly, and the fact that I had two sticks and needed the grip with my hands on the moving banisters, all confused me. I tried once and pulled back. I tried again and failed again. All of my fellow passengers had by now departed to the surface and the place was quiet . Then came a ringing voice .“Are you in trouble? Can we help? “A young couple, perhaps mid 20s in age, with voices full of concern and also full of the confidence that they could help anything. I explained. The young man told me how easy it was going to be, linked arms with me while holding my sticks in his other hand and we marched together onto the moving staircase. It was easy. At the top he said “123 and off we go!“ And so we did. We shook hands and he was gone, back on the down escalator  to rejoin his partner. I stood in the station hallway and glowed, and then another realisation dawned. I had a rail ticket, not a tube ticket. Tube train exits require cards to be placed in slots or upon contact points. Neither of these could be readily identified by my depleted eyesight. No helpful staff member was available. I might have risen to the surface by human generosity, but I was still trapped!

The only passengers around me were incoming, passing through the turnstiles to go down to the platforms. One of these , a businessman in a, padded jacket concentrating on his screen bumped into me. “I say, you look lost! Do you need help?“ My mumbled affirmative was enough. He strode powerfully to the staff kiosk, rapped on the door and then , in a commanding voice, bade those within to come out and let me through the barriers. He was gone before I could thank him. A staff member duly released me into the crowded streets and the refuge of London taxi.

I am not a religious person and I have long regarded Christmas as no more than a commercial opportunity. I do believe in my fellow humankind, and I think that most of us will do good if given a decent opportunity. I have an optimist and the events of this day.bouyed my optimism. I think that quiet and casual good works should be celebrated.

 It was also my birthday. I wish  a very happy Christmas and the splendid 2025 to the anonymous people who helped me that day, and the many others who have helped me through the year in 1000 tiny ways. Thank you, one and all.

Last week’s announcement that the Indian government had concluded a “One Nation One Subscription “deal with 30 major journal publishers to allow 18 million users free access to previously paid for journal articles over five years starting on the 1st of January 2025 should, in my view, have sent a ripple of apprehension through the journal publishing businesses. Instead, the only people who commented immediately, were Indian academics who espoused the cause of open access and saw it as a retrograde deal.

Personally, I see it is a landmark deal. It has the potential, over time, to change very many things. It has apparently taken five years to construct this agreement, but just think of it in precedent terms. If India can do this, then why not Brazil? If it is appropriate for India then surely it is hugely appropriate for countries in Africa and South Asia who have real problems with the cost of access? This could expand the existing provision hugely and remove all the limitations which great schemes like Research4Life, Hinari , Agora and Oare have always suffered from.

But this, I imagine, was not the objective. While the 30 publishers gathered together to negotiate this, hopefully holding hands with their anti trust lawyers all the while, they might have been thinking about the problems of illicit use in India or indeed the threat of the Indian state declaring their monopoly illegal. I have very happy members from the 1970s of publishing books through the then British Council  overseas aid scheme “The English Language Book Society”. These  ELBS editions were meant to cut out illegal local reprinting by publishing at a third of the price of the  UK edition, the difference made up by the UK government.

I recall standing in a bookshop in Kuala Lumpur one day and being shown my own company;s first year university biology textbook. displayed on the shelf alongside four Indian  and  Malaysian pirated  editions, all illegally reproduced and all selling for less than mine!

However, the reasoning behind distinguishing this as a landmark move is slightly different. I think that in Europe and the USA we have a problem in imagining that the huge research and innovation enterprises in science and technology now funded by the Indian and Chinese governments, and increasingly by the Brazilians and others, will forever and always want to publish through multinational companies domiciled in Berlin or Amsterdam or New York. While brand and prestige still rule, and commonly used metric systems refuse to recognise change and experimentation, the current situation just holds. Loosen any of those ties and it could become very attractive for an Indian or Chinese state publishing house to assume the publishing role, creating diamond open access by legislation at a single stroke!

And as I have so often written here, I do think that the ties are loosening. The assumption, for a start, that US, UK and EU science research will always prevail in quality and size of funding terms is now shot to pieces. In an interview that I conducted a week ago with a Chinese AI researcher in Beijing, we explored both the huge progress being made in China and the collaborative nature of much of the research that will drive AI forward. We are now past the point where publications in chemistry in the leading journals are dominated by Chinese researchers: publications, not submissions. We are also past the point where Indian data scientists go to Silicon Valley automatically to seek work. At all levels. Indian data science has world leadership capacity.

I have argued in the past that self publishing will have huge importance in the future development of reporting scientific research and innovation.. I think that the CEREUS model , whenrevised to repair its current deficiencies and, as now backed by springer  Nature has a huge future, but self publishing will take many forms . It logically takes forward existing pre-print server publishing into a more controlled and managed environment using peer review potentially pre-and post publication.  In fields like medical science, I see huge importance in institutional publishing, as major players seek to underline and demonstrate the quality and extent of their research activities -and brand them. I also see that funders may wish, in certain circumstances, to become research publishers themselves . Governments have a poor track record in open publishing, but the geopolitical changes in the balance of power may make them feel that this is a role for them. Isolationist politicians and trade war warriors all over the world are likely to complicate things, by not seeing what is happening or by defending so called “national interests”.

Finally, when those 30 publishers were all in the same room, I wonder if the conversation strayed away from debating what the Indian government might be persuaded to hello, hello there I’m fine. How are you pay them to some momentary thoughts about what collaboration might produce elsewhere. Did they ponder, I wonder, on the possibility of a self regulation system for the acceptance of articles might reduce bogus submissions and increase the integrity of their publications.? Perhaps they spent an odd moment considering standardised peer review procedures so that all researchers could be sure that all articles had been scrutinised in approximately the same way? I know, I know. It is a lot to ask. But it is Christmas, and old men must be allowed to dream…


keep looking »