And Hate Shall Set You Free

And Hate Shall Set You Free 

SA von Hell after William Blake (2025) [a]

 

  

I. 

 

"We hate old friends: we hate old books: we hate old opinions; and at last we come to hate ourselves." [b] 

 

That's a great line from Hazlitt: far more philosophically profound and liberating than the Christian idea of learning to love one's enemies and the Californian injunction to love the self.   

 

Love binds: but it's hate that shall set you free; free from the expectation of those who think they know you best and oblige you to remain the person you've always been; free from ideas and viewpoints that have become fixed and congeal into forms of doxa or harden still further into dogma; free from a model of self born of internalised cruelty that some think of as an essential soul and others discuss in terms of subjective identity.  

 

 

II. 

 

Of course, it's difficult breaking from old friends and family members (unless they die or conveniently move far away). Nevertheless, it can be liberating to both parties to encounter one another once more as strangers (an acquaintance of mine once told me that he never loved his wife more than after their estrangement and subsequent divorce).    

 

The fact is, times change and we change and whilst some old friendships can last a lifetime, other friendships become "cold, comfortless, and distasteful" [131] like a plate of cold meat served up over and over again and even if we would like to revive old feelings that's impossible: "The stomach turns against them." [131]  

 

 

III. 

 

Perhaps it's even more difficult breaking from the authors one has loved; even when fully aware that one rewards great teachers not with loyalty but infidelity and by reading them against themselves; giving them over, as Hazlitt says, to the dissecting-knife or opening them up to ridicule [c].  

 

And great books must also be laid aside at some point and allowed to gather dust [d] - even become a little worm-eaten and mouldy. For as Nietzsche writes somewhere or other, it says nothing against the greatness of a spirit - or, in this case, a book - that it contains a few worms; corruption is a sign of maturity or ripeness and doesn't diminish overall value [e].  

 

IV. 

 

"As to my old opinions, I am heartily sick of them. I have reason, for they have deceived me sadly." [135] 

 

Again, I know exactly what Hazlitt means: old ideas and old beliefs that I once subscribed to in all sincerity at the very least embarrass today; words I once used to identify myself - punk and pagan, for example - "are become to my ears a mockery and a dream" [135].  

 

A true philosopher, says Nietzsche, cannot belong to any church or party that requires members to have moral convictions or political principles; for a philosopher is someone who burrows their way into a body, through it, and out the other side and never holds on to even their own ideas for too long, for this would imply that one could know oneself well enough to trust one's own thoughts and that simply isn't the case:

 

"We are unknown to ourselves, we knowers [...] We remain strange to ourselves out of necessity, we do not understand ourselves, we must confusedly mistake who we are [...]" [f] 

 

Hazlitt appears to find this lack of self-knowledge good cause for self-contempt; "mistaken as I have been in my public and private hopes [...] always disappointed where I placed most reliance [...] have I not reason to hate and to despise myself?" [136]

 

But then he adds an amusing final twist:  "Indeed I do; and chiefly for not having hated and despised the world enough." [136]

 

 

Notes

 

[a] The phrase hate shall set you free is obviously playing on the well-known biblical line: 'And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free' (John 8:32 KJV). 

      Ever quick to point out the bleeding obvious and display it's moral colours, the Google AI assistant was keen to inform me that the phrase 'hate shall set you free' is neither a universally recognised nor an accepted statement and that the original saying is emphasising the liberating power of truth, not hate: 

      "While some may interpret it to mean that rejecting societal norms or expectations (through hate or defiance) can lead to liberation, it's crucial to understand that this interpretation is not a standard or positive one." 

      If I were Tracey Emin, I may have been tempted to write the phrase 'hate shall set you free' in the form of a neon sign, but - as I'm not Tracey Emin - I've simply added it the text to William Blake's 'Albion Rose', which can be found in A Large Book of Designs (1793-96). 

      I'm sure he wouldn't object; for Blake acknowledges the vital importance of hate as well as love within human existence by arguing that: "Without contraries there is no progression." See the Argument that opens The Marriage of Heaven and Hell (1790-93).       

 

[b] William Hazlitt, 'On the Pleasure of Hating', essay in The Plain Speaker: Opinions on Books, Men, and Things, originally published anonymously in two volumes, in 1826. 

      I am quoting from the text as it appears in Volume 7 of The Collected Works of William Hazlitt, ed. A. R. Waller and Arnold Glover (J. M. Dent and Co., 1903), p. 130, which was published as an eBook by Project Gutenberg in 2018: click here. Future page references to Hazlitt's essay will be given directly in the text.

 

[c] Hazlitt is right to say that we are aided and abetted in this by the fact that sometimes our favourite writers suddenly become fashionable and subject to an outpouring of academic analysis: 

      "The popularity of the most successful writers operates to wean us from them, by the cant and fuss that is made about them, by hearing their names everlastingly repeated, and by the number of ignorant and indiscriminate admirers they draw after them." [133]

     

[d] Even Hazlitt has some reservations about this; surely, he says, "there are some works, that, like nature, can never grow old and that must always touch the imagination and passions alike!" 

      Or, at the very least, there are books that contain passages "that seem as if we might brood over them all our lives, and not exhaust the sentiments of love and admiration they excite" [133]. 

      Having said that, however, Hazlitt confesses that, for him at least, any passage - even the most beautiful or stirring - soon becomes vapid if we read or recite it too often (see p. 134).

 

[e] See Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human, trans. R. J. Hollingdale (Cambridge University Press, 1986), Vol. 2, Part 1, Section 353, p. 292.

 

[f] Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality, ed. Keith Ansell-Pearson, trans. Carol Diethe (Cambridge University Press, 1994), p. 3.  

 

 

For a couple of other recent posts inspired by Hazlitt's essay 'On the Pleasure of Hating' - discussing topics including spiders, ghosts, and witches - please click here and/or here.  

 

 

On the Need to Fear Ghosts and Hate Witches

Be thou a witch or a spirit, thou com'st 

in such an enchanting form, that I will speak of thee. [1] 

 

 

According to William Hazlitt, if there's one thing men hate it's to be bored. And evil - in small, chaotic doses at least - does bring a little danger and a touch of horror into the world, i.e., an element of excitement to counter the tedium of everyday life: 

 

"How loth were we to give up our pious belief in ghosts and witches, because we liked to persecute the one, and frighten ourselves to death with the other!" [2] 

 

 

Notes

 

[1] I'm paraphrasing from Shakespeare's Hamlet (Act 1, scene 4). 

 

[2] William Hazlitt, 'On the Pleasure of Hating', essay in The Plain Speaker: Opinions on Books, Men, and Things, originally published anonymously in two volumes, in 1826. 

      I am quoting from the text as it appears in Volume 7 of The Collected Works of William Hazlitt, ed. A. R. Waller and Arnold Glover (J. M. Dent and Co., 1903), p. 128, which was published as an eBook by Project Gutenberg in 2018: click here.   

 

Readers may be interested in two sister posts inspired by Hazlitt's essay 'On the Pleasure of Hating': 

 

'There is a Spider Crawling' (12 August 2025): click here. 

 

'And Hate Shall Set You Free' (15 August 2025): click here. 

 

 

A Brief (Somewhat Belated) Note on the Online Safety Act and the Peter Kyle / Nigel Farage Spat

Peter Kyle MP / Nigel Farage MP

 

A lot of people are expressing concern about the Online Safety Act (2023); a new set of laws passed to protect children - and adults - from all kinds of online content deemed to be potentially harmful by Ofcom (an independent regulator, albeit one established by Parliament and which is overseen by the Culture Secretary).  

 

Some critics worry about how it might impact on free speech and privacy; others say that it will be largely ineffective at restricting access to content and so is doomed to failure.  

 

To be honest, it's not an issue that particularly excites my interest. However, the moment I hear supporters of the Act pleading with us to think of the children à la Helen Lovejoy [1] - thereby transforming an important and complex question into a simple moral issue in order to effectively shutdown debate - I immediately side with the critics.

 

What does interest, however, is the manner in which everything moral, orthodox and conformist - i.e., everything which was traditionally associated with conservatism - has passed yet again to the political left and that it's members of Keir Starmer's Labour Party who most vociferously support the Act and, indeed, wish to strengthen it still further. 

 

Reform UK, on the other hand - a party on the populist right of the British political spectrum - have pledged to repeal the Act if elected into government, prompting the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, Peter Kyle, to make the unpleasant and ludicrous accusation that Nigel Farage is on the side of those peddling hate as well as sexual predators like Jimmy Savile.

 

It's ironic that this remark should be made by the Rt Hon. Member for Hove and Portslade, as Kyle is someone who opposes all forms of hate speech and wants the online world to effectively become a virtual safe space; i.e., an inclusive, supportive, and secure environment ideal for monkeys who wish to see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil. 

 

Why is it that those on the virtue-signalling left are often the ones who spew some of the most vile and vicious invective? 

 

Might it be because they tie hate (disguised as love) to judgement rather than joy, unaware that by so doing they corrode and corrupt their own hearts and turn what begins as a desire for political correctness into a resentment-riddled ideology which "leaves to virtue nothing but the spirit of censoriousness, and a narrow, jealous, inquisitorial watchfulness over the actions and motives of others" [2].

 

 

Notes

 

[1] See the post published on 30 Jan 2016 in which I discuss this 'think of the children' ploy: click here. 

 

[2] William Hazlitt, 'On the Pleasure of Hating', essay in The Plain Speaker: Opinions on Books, Men, and Things, originally published anonymously in two volumes, in 1826. 

      I am quoting from the text as it appears in Volume 7 of The Collected Works of William Hazlitt, ed. A. R. Waller and Arnold Glover (J. M. Dent and Co., 1903), p. 130, which was published as an eBook by Project Gutenberg in 2018: click here. 

 

 

There is a Spider Crawling ...

 

'Without spiders, flies would have no wings ...'

 

 

Hazlitt's essay opens with a lovely passage about a spider crawling along the floor towards him. Rather than crush the unwelcome intruder, he allows the creature to pass by in peace and, in fact, aids his escape into a darkened space. 

 

This is the mark of a man whose philosophy has taught him how to behave with restraint even when confronted by a creepy-crawly whom he instinctively hates the sight of. In other words, although the spirit of malevolence has been curbed to the extent that he doesn't commit a needlessly cruel act, he still feels negatively towards the eight-legged other:    

 

"We give up the external demonstration, the brute violence, but cannot part with the essence or principle of hostility. We do not tread upon the poor little animal in question (that seems barbarous and pitiful!) but we regard it with a sort of mystic horror and superstitious loathing." [127-28] [a]

 

Hazlitt suspects it will take "another hundred years of fine writing and hard thinking" [128] before he gets over his arachnophobia and learn how to regard spiders with something approaching love and kindness. 

 

However, he doesn't wish to be cured entirely of his ability to hate. For without having something to hate - if not spiders, then snakes; if not snakes, then other people - man's ability to act or even to think is seriously compromised and rather than resembling a fast-moving and sparkling stream, life becomes a stagnant pool. 

 

Moralists may not like the fact, but pure goodness soon grows insipid and man finds delight in his unruly passions. Indeed, it may even be the case, as Zarathustra says, that man needs 'what is most evil in him for what is best in him.' [b] 

 

So it is that there's a seceret affinity between love and hate and the human heart desires the latter as much as the former. And since love soon turns to indifference or disgust, says Hazlitt, perhaps "hatred alone is immortal" [128] amongst the passions; not only the longest lasting, but primary, due to the simple fact that there is always a "quantity of superfluous bile" [128]. 

 

 

Notes

 

[a] William Hazlitt, 'On the Pleasure of Hating', essay in The Plain Speaker: Opinions on Books, Men, and Things, originally published anonymously in two volumes, in 1826. 

      I am using the text as it appears in volume 7 of The Collected Works of William Hazlitt, ed. A. R. Waller and Arnold Glover (J. M. Dent and Co., 1903), published as an eBook by Project Gutenberg in 2018: click here. All page numbers refer to this edition. 

 

[b] See Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra,  'The Convalescent' (2). 

      Of course, before either Nietzsche or Hazlitt were writing, Blake had already recognised that evil was only another term for the active expenditure of energy and that the feeling that results from this is a form of eternal delight. See 'The Marriage of Heaven and Hell' (1790).  

 

 

Readers may be interested in two sister posts inspired by Hazlitt's essay 'On the Pleasure of Hating':

 

'On the Need to Fear Ghosts and Hate Witches' (14 August 2025): click here.  

'And Hate Shall Set You Free' (15 August 2025): click here. 

 

 

In Memory of Imogen Hassall (the Countess of Cleavage)

Imogen Hassall (1942-1980) seen here as a sultry gypsy woman; 

a bikini-clad cave girl; and carrying on as Jenny Grubb   

 

I. 

 

Somewhat surprisingly for an actress who would become known in the 1960s and '70s for playing sexy, scantily clad characters in film and on TV - and who was referred to in the tabloid press as the Countess of Cleavage - the thing I admire most about Imogen Hassall is that although born in Woking, she had something a bit exotic about her - which probably explains why she was often cast as a foreign beauty in shows like The Saint and The Persuaders! [1].   

 

As much as her television work would make an interesting topic for discussion - as well as the above shows, she appeared also in episodes of The Avengers (1967), The Champions (1968), and Jason King (1972) [2] - it's three of her films, all released in 1970, that I wish to look at here ...

 

 

II. 

 

Let's start with an adaptation of a novella by D. H. Lawrence; The Virgin and the Gypsy (1970), dir. Christopher Miles and written by Alan Plater. 

Whilst Miss Hassall doesn't have a very large role in the film - and is credited simply as 'the Gypsy's Wife' - it's always nice to see her on screen, particularly when, as here, she's cheerfully perpetuating the racial and sexual stereotype of the dark-faced gipsy-woman, with a red shawl wrapped round her and swinging her flounced, voluminous skirt as she walks:

 

"She was handsome in a bold, dark, long-faced way, just a bit wolfish. She looked like one of the bold, loping Spanish gipsies" - and she spoke "with a certain foreign stiffness" [3].

The film remains fairly faithful to Lawrence's text; so much so, in fact, that Columbia Pictures, who were originally backing the movie, withdrew their support, leaving Miles and producer Kenneth Harper in something of a pickle (it took them two years to find alternative finance). 

 

It was well-received by film critics and cinema audience alike; indeed, it was even nominated for a Golden Globe and the stars of the film, Franco Nero (as the Gypsy) and Joanna Shimkus (as the Virgin) were praised for their performances. 

 

But when I watch it now, it's only to see Imogen reading palms with her cruel-seeming fingers; or nursing a baby with her lovely bare breast, its mole cinque-spotted; or telling Yvette to beware the voice of the water ... [4]

 

 

III.

I'd like next to offer a few brief remarks on the third in Hammer's prehistoric series - or cave girl flicks - When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth (1970) [5] ...

 

Written and directed by Val Guest, and co-starring Miss Hassal, as Ayak, alongside the American model and actress Victoria Vetri, as Sanna; both women demonstrating that it wasn't only Raquel Welch who knew how to rock a stone age bikini one million years BC (i.e., an age of unknown terrors, pagan worship and virgin sacrifice).

 

For those who like this kind of thing - and I'm one of them - this is the kind of thing we like. 

 

It's not Shakespeare, but it is a lot of fun and, interestingly, Val Guest's screenplay was based on a treatment by J. G. Ballard, who, in his 2008 autobiography, revealed that he too was a fan of Hammer films, which, he said, had "tremendous panache and visual attack, without a single wasted frame" [6]. 

 

And so, when contacted by the producer Aida Young - who informed him she was a great admirer of his work, particulary The Drowned World (1962) - Ballard was happy to meet up and share a few ideas; whether he suggested that Imogen's character - the jealous and scheming Ayak - should meet a diabolical end in a pit of quicksand, I don't know (but I doubt it). 

 

 

IV.

 

Finally, we come to the third film in our discussion; Carry On Loving (dir. Gerald Thomas, 1970) ...

 

This is probably nobody's favourite Carry On, but, actually, it's by no means the weakest in the long-running film series and has most of the familiar faces, as this trailer indicates: click here. 

 

However, it also has a couple of newcomers, one of whom is Imogen Hassall as prim and proper Jenny Grubb who transforms into something of a bombshell (much to the delight of the middle-aged Romeo looking for love played by Terry Scott). 

 

If, in a sense, she is simply filling in for Valerie Leon, Miss Hassall nevertheless puts in an excellent performance, as does Jackie Piper as her flatmate, Sally Martin - unknown star of stage, screen and television - appearing here in her second Carry On. 

 

As, by all accounts, Imogen was popular with both members of the cast and fans of the series, it's a surprise she didn't return in a later film. But there you go. Perhaps she didn't want to be typecast and had grown tired of always being the buxom brunette (she was clearly talented enough to play the more serious roles she craved).

 

Unfortunately, as her star began to wane and her personal life was increasingly marked by tragedy - including the death of a baby daughter four days after she was born in 1972 - Imogen did incline to sadness and was found dead at her Wimbledon home on the morning of November 16th, 1980: suicide by overdose.

 

She was, to paraphrase William Hazlitt, perhaps the most tender and most artless of all those young women who lit up the screens in the 1960s and '70s.  

     

Notes

 

[1] She played the Greek beauty (Sophia) in a 1964 episode of The Saint (for full details on IMDb, click here); and the Italian beauty (Maria) in the first episode of The Persuaders! in 1971 (for full details on IMDb, click here).

[2] See: The Avengers, 'Escape in Time' (S5/E3), in which she plays an Indian character named Anjali; The Champions, 'Reply Box No. 666' (S1/E3), in which she plays a character called Cleo; Jason King, 'The Stones of Venice' (S1/E20), in which she plays a character called Gina.   

[3] D. H. Lawrence, The Virgin and the Gipsy, in The Virgin and the Gipsy and Other Stories, ed. Michael Herbert, Berhan Jones and Lindeth Vasey, (Cambridge University Press, 2005), p. 21. 

      I have written about the racial and sexual stereotyping of Romani women - and the trope of the Hot Gypsy Girl - elsewhere on Torpedo the Ark: click here. 

 

[4] These scenes from Christopher Miles's movie can be viewed on the Facebook page 'In Loving Memory of Imogen Hassal': click here. 

[5] In the UK the film was released as When Dinosaurs Ruled the World, but seems now to be known by the US title, even on the BFI website. To watch the original trailer, click here. And to watch a rather charming short interview with Imogen Hassall discussing the film, click here.    

[6] See J. G. Ballard, Miracles of Life, (Fourth Estate, 2008). 

      Ballard was also impressed with the fact that directors of the Hammer movies were "surprisingly free to push their obsessions to the limit".