The statement:
2009 has been a year of deep reflection — a chance for Britain, as a nation, to commemorate the profound debts we owe to those who came before. A unique combination of anniversaries and events have stirred in us that sense of pride and gratitude which characterise the British experience. Earlier this year I stood with Presidents Sarkozy and Obama to honour the service and the sacrifice of the heroes who stormed the beaches of Normandy 65 years ago. And just last week, we marked the 70 years which have passed since the British government declared its willingness to take up arms against Fascism and declared the outbreak of World War Two. So I am both pleased and proud that, thanks to a coalition of computer scientists, historians and LGBT activists, we have this year a chance to mark and celebrate another contribution to Britain’s fight against the darkness of dictatorship; that of code-breaker Alan Turing.
Turing was a quite brilliant mathematician, most famous for his work on breaking the German Enigma codes. It is no exaggeration to say that, without his outstanding contribution, the history of World War Two could well have been very different. He truly was one of those individuals we can point to whose unique contribution helped to turn the tide of war. The debt of gratitude he is owed makes it all the more horrifying, therefore, that he was treated so inhumanely. In 1952, he was convicted of ‘gross indecency’ — in effect, tried for being gay. His sentence — and he was faced with the miserable choice of this or prison — was chemical castration by a series of injections of female hormones. He took his own life just two years later.
Thousands of people have come together to demand justice for Alan Turing and recognition of the appalling way he was treated. While Turing was dealt with under the law of the time and we can’t put the clock back, his treatment was of course utterly unfair and I am pleased to have the chance to say how deeply sorry I and we all are for what happened to him. Alan and the many thousands of other gay men who were convicted as he was convicted under homophobic laws were treated terribly. Over the years millions more lived in fear of conviction.
I am proud that those days are gone and that in the last 12 years this government has done so much to make life fairer and more equal for our LGBT community. This recognition of Alan’s status as one of Britain’s most famous victims of homophobia is another step towards equality and long overdue.
But even more than that, Alan deserves recognition for his contribution to humankind. For those of us born after 1945, into a Europe which is united, democratic and at peace, it is hard to imagine that our continent was once the theatre of mankind’s darkest hour. It is difficult to believe that in living memory, people could become so consumed by hate — by anti-Semitism, by homophobia, by xenophobia and other murderous prejudices — that the gas chambers and crematoria became a piece of the European landscape as surely as the galleries and universities and concert halls which had marked out the European civilisation for hundreds of years. It is thanks to men and women who were totally committed to fighting fascism, people like Alan Turing, that the horrors of the Holocaust and of total war are part of Europe’s history and not Europe’s present.
So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely thanks to Alan’s work I am very proud to say: we’re sorry, you deserved so much better.
Geoffrey Pullum (Language Log) elaborates:
Turing did indeed deserve so much better. He created modern theoretical computer science; opened fundamental new areas of mathematical logic; made very important contributions to other areas of mathematics (e.g., the technique known as Good-Turing frequency estimation in statistics); and most importantly, he gave up his academic work during the Second World War to work at Bletchley Park on the extremely difficult task of decrypting German communications encrypted with the Enigma machine. The Bletchley Park team did succeed, and thus the Royal Navy became able to read the content of all the Nazis' messages to U-boats in the North Atlantic. It was a crucial turning point in the war. But a mere seven years later, a young man shared Turing's bed for the night in Manchester, and later helped someone burgle the house, and Turing naively reported the theft to the police. The police reaction was to arrest Turing, because they guessed what had been going on. "Gross indecency" was the charge (it is the British legal euphemism for cocksucking). Turing had a choice between serving prison time or agreeing to chemical castration, a medicalized "cure" for his presumed abnormality. He bore the latter for two years and then took cyanide. The way British mid-20th-century sex law drove him to suicide was genuinely something for the country to be ashamed of. It was good to see the official apology (which hundreds of eminent scientists had asked the Prime Minister to express).
Plus, as Pullum says, "That's how to say it ...: not a bunch of evasive mumbling about how unfortunate it all was, but a simple 'We're sorry.'"
I do wonder if we're drawing somewhat too narrow a lesson, though. It seems much of the narrative is something like: we used to think homosexuality was extremely immoral, and we did bad things to Turing as a result; but we now think differently, so apologize for persecuting him on a mistaken basis.
But isn't there something to regret about his treatment per se? That is, it's not just that he was persecuted on a mistaken basis, but that his treatment by the state should be troubling even if the basis had been justifiable.
He was convicted of sleeping with a 19-year-old. Since when does that make one a pedophile?
Care to cite your source? Or is this just Drive-By Unfounded Libel Friday?
The subtext here seems to be not that what they did was wrong in and of itself, merely that they're sorry for not granting Turing a special exemption from the treatment that people like him would otherwise deserve.
They should apologize to everyone who was ever arrested for being homosexual.
He is underrated, in my view. I thought his address to the Joint Meeting of Congress was outstanding.
Everybody knows all homosexuals are pedophiles.
You can probably blame the Greeks for that.
Just like all heterosexuals are pedophiles, too.
Brown has to sell his apology to the British public, not all of whom are completely cozy with gay folks; making Turing out to be a war hero (which he was, in a 20th-century way) helps push the injustice angle.
"Alan and the many thousands of other gay men who were convicted as he was convicted under homophobic laws were treated terribly. Over the years millions more lived in fear of conviction."
I'll offer two; plural marriage and incest between two consenting adults
However, the evidence is strongly suggestive that the removal of his security clearance was the proximate cause of his suicide rather than shame or despondency resulting from the public revelation of his homosexuality and the ensuing punishment/"treatment". The loss of his security clearance prevented him from doing cutting edge work in his preferred areas of research. It's my understanding that among friends Turing was pretty open about his sexual preferences.
I'm glad that Britain has apologized to this man who contributed so much to his fellow human beings.
I was unaware of Turing's story.
It does seem that the English are far more concerned about criminals than citizens when it comes to violent crime these days.
I spent two summers working there, many trips subsequently, met some wonderful people. Hope they get things straightened out sometime.
One of the Oxford four was blackmailed into espionage over his sexuality
Keynes had no problem but according to his diaries he was indeed a pedophile
The bigoted and ignorant abused an innocent man and shackled every man. They will always be among us, making formal and public acts such as this one important.
IIRC, in addition to his work solving the Enigma, he helped break the so-called "Tunny" class cipher, a real-time teletype cipher manufactured by Lorenz.
He also did trail blazing work in biology explaining patterns like the striping of certain animals. I don't understand enough to comment further.
Do read Hodges book.
It's nice to see the apology. Long overdue.
Breaking the Code
I didn't know the story of Turing before seeing the play—although obviously I knew of the man since I was a CS major—but it was very moving. It was also nice to see Jenny Agutter, who hadn't been heard from on this side of the pond since "Logan's Run"
The apology was long overdue. Turing was a bona fide war hero, and a genius in his field the likes of which have not been seen since.
Seems unlikely to me. Scientific advances underlie the improved understanding of homosexuality. I don't think it's likely to work that way for incest, specifically.
I think smoking marijuana may be decriminalized, but I don't foresee any high-profile apologies.
Well, Michael Jackson liked twenty eight year olds.
Yeah, let me log in to my westlaw.uk and look it up for you.
In reality he was convicted for sleeping with a "teenage" boy.
Mark N, although he may be more famous for some of his theoretical work in information theory and computer science, I believe that what made the UK government's actions against him so egregious was specifically because of his WWII contributions. The man was an indispensible war hero, plain and simple.
I might be biased because of I recognize him as one of the pioneering giants of my job field, but to me his work at Bletchley Park is what makes him such an amazing figure. I hope GCHQ has something to honor his memory as well.
Last time I checked, nineteen is well within the range of teenager.
But we do get your point: Turing had sex with some people you find inappropriate, so it's okay that he was treated the way he was.
Thankfully, our society has evolved a bit since then, as evidenced by Brown's apology, even if some people are still stuck in that mindset.
My point is that he had sex with minors, and I'd like to see ONE CREDIBLE source that says the boy was 19. The boy was underage when the affair started and he was not the only one either. These records are not on some internet forums or websites, but you may find them in libraries in Europe.
I have a lot of respect and admiration for his work and genius as a computer science person but I don't think it's right that the pedophilia aspect of his life is being swept under the rug by the media just because he is the father of computers.
Of course. This sort of cheap rhetoric is becoming a fixture of the Brown government. Watch Nigel Farrage, UKIP MEP, rip into Brown here in an epic speech when he came before the European Parliament groveling for stimulus money:
"Your government has apologized for the Amritsar Massacre; you've apologized for slavery; you've apologized for virtually everything! -- will you please apologize for what you did as British Chancellor, and then perhaps, we might just listen to you."
He told me once that for sheer, outrageous do-anything-asked courage no one surpassed homosexual men. He didn't presume to offer an explanation, just said it was so.
So far as I know they were never recognized. Hardly surprising, but very regrettable.
This site needs an edit function.
…not that there's anything wrong with that.
He can't be, he's Scottish.
And of course, we'd like to see ONE CREDIBLE source that say the boy was not 19, but younger. And substantially so, enough to qualify as a boy and not a man.
I'm sorry that consensual sex between an older man and a younger man upsets you so, but that's your problem, not ours, and it certainly is not a concern of the authorities.
The fact remains that Turing was convicted not of having sex with a man too young, but the fact that he had sex with a male of ANY age. The is the absurdity that Brown is now apologizing for, not whether anyone thinks his relationship with Murray was appropriate.
I understand the point that we shouldn't overlook the flaws of great men in lauding them, but you haven't produced evidence that Turing was a flawed man in any sense at all, other than dark references to certain "libraries."
That being said, I'm sick of cheap, no-cost historical apologies. There seems to be, on the left, a constant search for people to apologize to.
Why don't these folks apologize to the rest of us for apologizing too much, and claiming to do it on our behalf.
Even if someone in the government who knew the secret wanted to help Turing by getting the case dropped, they couldn't: Questions about the reason for the intervention in the matter would run the risk of leading to a revelation of the secret, causing the loss of the ability to read those smaller countries' communications.
I blame Obama. :)
Now, I'm not Gordon Brown, didn't vote for Gordon Brown, am not a British subject, and have, to the best of my knowledge, never even seen Gordon Brown on television. I don't see any problem with my apologizing for his actions, though.
No, really.
Brown's "apology" amounts to, "I'm sorry that some people who are long dead treated a prominent person badly when I was three years old." Will we next see a sincere apology for the way that Charles I was treated by Parliament? For that matter, I think that Harold Godwinson really deserves an apology for the way he was handled by William of Normandy at Hastings. William's claim to the throne was completely insupportable by any right-thinking person.
And let's not even start with the whole issue of Boudicca's rebellion. That's a can of worms* you definitely don't want to open.
ps. Lest there be any question, I think that Turing's treatment was appalling. But at this remove, that is an issue for condemnation, not apology, unless one of the principles in the matter wishes to come forward.
* Dead worms, to be sure. Even the worms that ate those worms are dead. But surely that's no bar to a sincere apology, is it?
If the next C Street sex scandal were to involve a heterosexual relationship featuring a 19-year-old, I would not expect charges of pedophilia. Which should enable most of the anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-contraception, anti-sex-education, pro-covenant marriage, Ten Commandment-loving members of Congress to breathe easier.
Turing's article, accessible to a general educated audience, is a masterpiece of clear exposition which holds up remarkably well given that it concerns a technological area that has literally exploded exponentially over the intervening 6 decades. You really should read it.
If you do read it, you will see that the test as he describes it is somewhat different in detail than commonly described. (As a side note, it's interesting that Turing in 1950 believed the statistical evidence for telepathy to be overwhelming. If anyone knows what evidence he was referring to, I'd be interested in a citation.)
Aw, don't be so hard on Unknown. I'm sure that whenever anyone talks about the greatness of America, he's the party pooper who brings up our mistreatment of Native Americans for most of our history, and when people talk about how great Reagan was, he says, sure, but he supplied Saddam with arms, and when people talk about how Reagan was such a great conservative, he brings up his divorce and philandering during his acting days.
As for whether Gordon Brown should have apologized to all people who suffered under the law: there is something of a difference between persecuting an innocent man and persecuting an innocent man who has just saved you, your nation, and your entire way of life from utter destruction, at least in my opinion; that soupçon of ingratitude really perfects the injustice.
Back to definitions, just for a second.Literally? So I should literally call the bomb squad? "Hurry! Computer technology is exploding!"
Back to definitions, just for a second.
a technological area that has literally exploded exponentially over the intervening 6 decades
Literally? So I should literally call the bomb squad? "Hurry! Computer technology is exploding!"
[chuckle] thanks for catching my sloppiness. No, the explosion part wasn't literal. I should've said "...exploded, literally exponentially,..."
In my experience, the correlation among ranting against homosexuals, glorifying Reagan and refusing to acknowledge American support of brutal dictators is strong.
Even though I may have license to do otherwise, I'm going to continue to try to use "literally" to mean "exactly as described; in a literal way." For some reason, I just feel the need to, er, cleave to the original meaning:-)
As for Reagan's divorce and philandering (in the 50s he was known as dating quite a few women.), that goes contra the image that the religious right has of Reagan as the standard bearer of family values.
Furthermore, as time goes on and we learn more about Reagan, he looks even better. Brilliant, well read, excellent speaker, deadly opponent, master geopolitical player, determined in spite of constant ridicule and opposition. Even so, he wasn't perfect. So what.
Mark Zamen, author
If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.
Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.
We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.
And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.