Talking to Jasper Gerard about his new novel Saturday, Ian McEwan looks back on a certain ... let's just call it... ambience:
[W]hile Blair comes out of the book badly, anti-war protesters fare even worse.McEwan admits he has found himself "at odds" with friends in the liberal intelligentsia "with whom I'd naturally expect to agree". Indeed, his donnish uniform - blue cords, woolly jumper - would point to a different set of opinions but, as he says, this war is unusual.
He was appalled by articles cheering on the insurgents. "I would have thought that was a vote for anarchy and probably another one-party state."
He loathed the anti-war slogan Not In My Name. "Its cloying self-importance suggests a bright new world of protest, with the fussy consumer of shampoos and soft drinks demanding to feel good, or nice." Walking past marchers rather than with them, he says: "I was troubled by the sheer level of happiness on the street. I did think whatever the reasoning of America for going in, history has offered us this chance to get rid of Saddam. If you decide you don't want that, it is probably a very reasonable view, but it is a vote for more torture, more genocide. It's a sombre, grave choice."
He began as an opponent of war, having "megalomaniac, insomniac" fantasies of getting to Blair and managing to talk him out of it. "There were anxieties Baghdad would be razed, the UN estimated there would be 3m million refugees and half a million dead, although we might get there yet. I did feel there was a humanitarian argument to be made and was very disappointed the government never made it."
But he was certain the invasion was going to happen anyway. "When it did I fervently wanted it to succeed even though a big chunk of left liberal opinion really wanted it to fail."