Of course, I agree that I am on dodgy ground over George Bush. I said I thought it showed a weakness on my behalf.

Actually I have worried over this when I have thought about him for some time.

I try to see human qualities in the worst of people and recoil from the idea of evil which can be used as an excuse to hate someone without reservation.

I don’t hate Prince Harry for all that he represents the fag end of a hopefully defunct section of British society. He is probably a friendly enough buffoon albeit dangerously thick and vastly over-priviledged.

George Bush, was much more dangerous and destructive, I agree but, unlike the prince, he does not represent a class system which has the capacity to outlive the individual. He is, at least, very unpopular to his own electorate.

They both have redeeming features, I hope, but maybe that is the optimist rather than the judge in me talking.

I too love the works of Picasso and Wagner and do try to separate their output from their lives.

I suppose there could be a distinction between Picasso’s cruel effect on various women and Wagner’s legacy which inspired fanatical anti-semites into the murder of millions but then we are back in the ethically uneasy world of playing with numbers.

They were both flawed human beings without doubt. Both were gross egotists, riddled with insecurities and prone to talking nonsense.

They were also full of contradictions and not totally unloveable as people.

In a fairer world, Picasso would have married Cosima Wagner (one of the most unloveable figures in the history of the arts) and she could have used her ferocious talents in subduing the monarch of sexism.

Wagner may have been much less dangerous if he had been lucky enough to love one of those loving partners so callously thrown aside by Picasso.

That did not happen sadly and we are left a damaged legacy but also some of the most inspiring work that I know. Nothing would be gained by throwing away their art.