Tanks to roll through Washington as Trump hosts US military parade

Parade – ostensibly to mark US army’s 250th birthday – takes place as president turns 79 and comes amid large protests

Thousands of troops accompanied by dozens of tanks and aircraft will stream through the National Mall inWashington DCfor a military parade billed as celebrating the US army’s 250th birthday on Saturday – which also happens to be the day Donald Trump turns 79.

The president has long desired to hold a military parade in the capital, and is finally getting his wish months after returning to the White House for a second term, and days after ordering federalized California national guard and US marinesto the streets of Los Angelesin response to protests against deportations.

Washington DC will briefly become the second American city to see soldiers in its streets, albeit for markedly different reasons.

The all-day event held in the shadow of the Washington Monument will begin with a fitness competition and official ceremony to mark the army’s birthday with a cake. At 6.30pm ET, 6,700 soldiers accompanied by armored vehicles such as the M1A2 Abrams tanks are scheduled to march down Constitution Avenue Northwest past the White House, as Black Hawk, Chinook and Apache helicopters fly overhead. Trump will appear to preside over an enlistment and reenlistment ceremony and accept a flag from the Golden Knights Parachute Team, before fireworks will fill the sky.

“I think it’s time for us to celebrate a little bit. You know, we’ve had a lot of victories,” Trump said earlier this week. He has denied any connection between the parade and his birthday, instead noting that it coincides with the Flag Day holiday.

While Washington DC is used to playing host to an array of events in and around the National Mall and White House, the parade has proven to be particularly disruptive to day-to-day life in the overwhelmingly Democratic city of more than 700,000.

Coming at a cost the army estimates to be between $25m and $45m, the parade’s preparations have caused the closure of busy roads for up to four days, while flights at Ronald Reagan Washington National airport will halt for an unspecified time during the event.

City leaders have expressed concerns that the tanks and armored vehicles will damages roads not designed for their weight, and the army has said they will place metal plates on parts of the route, and outfit the equipment with rubber on their treads.

“President Trump’s longstanding wish to waste millions of taxpayer dollars for a performative military parade in the style of authoritarian leaders is finally coming true on his birthday,” said Eleanor Holmes Norton, the federal district’s Democratic non-voting delegate in the House of Representatives. She condemned the event’s expected impact on the city’s roads, as well as the decision to hold it after Trump’s administration spent monthsfiring federal workers or coaxing them to resign.

“Although this parade will feed President Trump’s ego and perhaps his base, it will not serve any legitimate purpose,” Holmes Norton said.

‘Miraculous’: how did passenger in seat 11A survive Air India crash?

Vishwash Kumar Ramesh must have acted fast to seize his unlikely chance to escape, say experts in crashes and safety

‘I saw people dying in front of my eyes’: British survivor describes Air India crash

Tony Cable, a former senior air crash investigator, has one piece of advice for Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, the sole survivor of the AirIndiaplane disaster: “Buy a lottery ticket straight away.”

The 40-year-old Briton walked away from the wreckage of flight AI171 after it crashed less than a minute after takeoff from Ahmedabad to London on Thursday, killing 241 other passengers and crew and dozens more on the ground.

Surviving with minor physical injuries seemed miraculous, but the focus on how Ramesh may have stayed alive turned to his seat on the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner – 11A, an emergency exit seat near the front of the plane and close to one of the strongest parts of the fuselage known as the “wing box”.

After the plane slammed into buildings about 30 seconds after takeoff, Ramesh thought he was dead, but when he realised he was alive he saw an opening in the fuselage. “I managed to unbuckle myself, used my leg to push through that opening, and crawled out,” he said. It was not clear whether this opening was the door or a rupture in the fuselage.

“The aircraft was pretty nose up when it hit the buildings,” said Cable, a former senior inspector of air accidents at the UK Air Accidents Investigations Branch. “It has presumably broken open in an area of the fuselage adjacent to this guy and fortuitously he has popped out without major injury.”

Ramesh’s seat had space, rather than seats, immediately in front of it, which may have given him more room for escape than many of his fellow passengers. It may also have meant that while the passengers in front of him may have been crushed together on impact, he avoided that fate, Prof John McDermid, Lloyd’s Register chair of safety at the University of York, said.

“My suspicion is that because of the nature of the impact, he was in a strong part of the airplane at the front edge of the wing,” he added. “There is not just the fuselage, but the extra structure of the wing to protect from the compression of the fuselage.”

“It’s possible that the impact loosened the door and he could kick it out and get out,” McDermid said. “The external door was only just in front of him so he didn’t have far to go.”

But before Ramesh could even consider an escape, he had to have the luck to survive the impact of the crash.

“If you’ve got an accident like this, where you’ve got an aircraft full of fuel and it’s making a crash landing off the airport into the built environment, that’s unlikely to be a survivable accident,” said Prof Ed Galea, an expert in fire safety and evacuation at the University of Greenwich. “The fact that anyone has survived is miraculous.

“He seems to have been lucky in that: a) he survived the trauma of the impact, b) he wasn’t severely injured in that crash, and c) he was sitting right by the No 2 exit. Whether he used that or exited via a rupture that was close by, is not clear. But he was very close to an exit point.”

Galea has previously carried out research on plane crashes which found that, in less devastating crashes, people sitting within five rows of a serviceable exit have a greater chance of surviving than dying while those more than five rows away were more likely to perish. He said he always tries to reserve a seat within five rows of an emergency exit.

Get the day’s headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning

Galea said other passengers may have also survived the impact but were too injured to evacuate or were not close enough to an exit point. Passengers who did not adopt the brace position may have struck their heads on the seats in front of them knocking them unconscious, but there were no seats immediately in front of Ramesh.

While the structure of the plane may have given him a chance at survival, Ramesh still needed to move fast to take that chance, said McDermid. “If he hadn’t got out in a very few seconds, he would have been unlikely to make it out because of the fireball,” he added.

The plane had enough fuel on board to carry it to London Gatwick and this appeared to ignite upon impact.

Galea said Ramesh may have found himself exiting in front of the fireball if the aviation fuel had been pouring from the ruptured tanks in a rearward direction.

“He was a very, very unlucky man being on that airplane, but he was also a very, very lucky man being able to get out,” McDermid concluded.

US marines detain civilian in first known instance since Trump deployed troops to LA

The civilian who was detained identified himself as Marcos Leao, an army veteran, and said he was treated ‘very fairly’

US marines deployed to Los Angeles on Friday temporarily detained a civilian, the US military confirmed, in the first known detention by active-duty troops deployed there byDonald Trump.

Marines took charge of the Wilshire federal building earlier on Friday in a rare domestic use of US troops after days of protests over immigration raids.

Reuters images showed marines apprehending a civilian, restraining his hands with zip ties and then handing him over to civilians from the Department of Homeland Security.

Asked about the incident, the US military’s northern command spokesperson said active-duty forces “may temporarily detain an individual in specific circumstances”.

“Any temporary detention ends immediately when the individual(s) can be safely transferred to the custody of appropriate civilian law enforcement personnel,” a spokesperson said.

About 200 US marines arrived in LA on Friday morning. This followed Donald Trump’s extraordinary decision to deploy national guard troops to LA last weekend, over the objections of the governor of California, Gavin Newsom. The marines were to take over protecting a federal building, US Army Maj Gen Scott Sherman, who commands the taskforce of marines and national guardsmen, said.

The streets had been mostly calm overnight going into Friday morning, marking the seventh day of protests across various areas and the third day of an overnight curfew in a small part of the huge downtown area.

The civilian who was detained spoke to reporters after he was released, identifying himself as Marcos Leao, 27, an army veteran who was on his way to the Department of Veterans Affairs when he crossed a taped-off area and was asked to stop.

Leao, who gained his US citizenship through military service, said he was treated “very fairly”.

“They’re just doing their job,” said Leao, who is of Angolan and Portuguese descent.

Sporadic demonstrations have also taken place in cities including New York, Chicago, Seattle and Austin on several days in the last week against Trump’s pushing of his mass deportation agenda, undertaken by targeting undocumented communities in the US interior.

And millions more are expected to turn out to protest on Saturday at roughly 2,000 sites nationwide in ademonstration dubbed “No Kings”against what critics see as Trump taking actions on the brink of authoritarianism.

The mass protests are timed to coincide with the US president’s controversial military parade in Washington DC to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the formation of the US army, and coincidentally his 79th birthday.

The protests inLos Angelesand subsequent deployment of California’s national guard by Trump, over the furious objections of Newsom, is a move that had not happened in the US in at least half a century, sparking a legal battle between the president and Newsom.

Late on Thursday, a federal judge ruled that the federal deployment of troops by the president to aid in civilian US law enforcement in LA should be blocked. The administration swiftly appealed and a higher court paused the restraining order until Tuesday, when it will hear the case.

Judge Charles Breyer’s ruling in Newsom v Trump stated that Trump had unlawfully bypassed congressionally mandated procedures.

Newsom in an interview with the New York Times podcast on Thursdaycalled Trump a “stone cold liar”for claiming he had discussed a federal deployment with the governor by telephone.

Democrats and advocacy groups view Trump’s deployment as an abuse of power aimed at suppressing free speech and supporting aggressive anti-immigration policies.

Trump’s use of the troops follows earlier, unfulfilled threats during the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests in his first administration, when he considered, but ultimately declined, to deploy federal troops and has sinceexpressed regretabout not cracking down more forcefully.

The president has defended his decision to send troops to LA claiming without any evidence that the city would have been “obliterated” and “burned to the ground” had he not initiated the deployment.

In Washington, Saturday’s parade is billed as a patriotic celebration, while critics argue it is more about Trump’s personal brand and ego than promoting national unity. Organizers of No Kings protests have avoided planning a demonstration in the nation’s capital, in an attempt to draw attention away from tanks, armored vehicles, troops and aircraft on display.

“The flag doesn’t belong to President Trump. It belongs to us,” read a statement from the No Kings protest movement.

The parade will culminate on Saturday evening with a procession of 6,600 soldiers, dozens of tanks, and a live broadcast message from an astronaut in space. Inspired by a Bastille Day parade Trump witnessed in France in 2017, but with strong echoes of the kind of regular displays under authoritarian regimes such as Russia, North Korea and China, the event is expected to cost up to $45m, sources toldNBC News.

Meanwhile, some members of the national guard troops deployed to Los Angeles and some of their family members have expresseddiscomfort with their mission, feeling it drags them into a politically charged domestic power struggle.

“The sentiment across the board right now is that deploying military force against our own communities isn’t the kind of national security we signed up for,” said Sarah Streyder of the Secure Families Initiative, which advocates for military families. “Families are scared not just for their loved ones’ safety, although that’s a big concern, but also for what their service is being used to justify.”

Chris Purdy of the Chamberlain Network echoed those concerns: “Morale is not great, is the quote I keep hearing,” he said, citing multiple national guard members who contacted his organization.

Amid the ongoing legal and political fallout, arrests have continued, although sporadic incidents of early looting have subsided. Jose Manuel Mojica, a 30-year-old father of four, wascharged with assaulting a federal officerduring a protest in Paramount, a community in southern Los Angeles County.

And on Thursday, Alex Padilla, a Democratic US senator for California and vocal critic of theTrump administration’s immigration polices, was forcibly removed and handcuffed as he attempted to ask a question at a press conference held byKristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, inLos Angeles.

Invideo takenof the incident that has since gone viral on social media, Padilla is seen being restrained and removed from the room by Secret Service and FBI agents. He warned that if this was how he was dealt with it spoke ill for ordinary civilians being summarily arrested and detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice).

Most Republican national lawmakers criticized Padilla, although some Republican senators condemned his treatment, while Democrats overwhelmingly applauded his challenge to the administration and were appalled at his removal.

Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles contributed reporting

Is Iran as close to building a nuclear weapon as Netanyahu claims?

Israeli PM alleges Tehran has capacity to make nine bombs. If so, Israel knows more than the US or the UN watchdog did

Middle East crisis – live updates

In justifying Israel’s attack on Iran, Israel’s prime minister,Benjamin Netanyahu, said he had acted to pre-empt a secret Iranian programme to build a nuclear bomb, claiming Tehran already had the capacity to build nine nuclear bombs. Israeli officials also claimed to have presented information to the US that Iran had recently made the necessary technical breakthroughs.

Netanyahu’s critics are saying he acted to pre-empt something else: a diplomatic agreement between the US and Iran on its civil nuclear programme, or even the demise of his own government. They point out thatIsraelhas been saying for 20 years that Iran is on the brink of building a bomb.

Either way, his claim largely depends on Israel’s formidable intelligence community possessing a greater state of knowledge about Iran’s nuclear programme than either its US counterparts or the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

As recently as 25 March, Tulsi Gabbard, the US director of national intelligence, told the Senate intelligence committee that the American intelligence community had assessed thatIranwas not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon.

However, Gabbard added that in the past years, there would appear to have been “an erosion of a decades-long taboo in Iran on discussing nuclear weapons in public, likely emboldening nuclear weapons advocates within Iran’s decision-making apparatus”.

She added: “Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons.”

A 22-page report declassified by the IAEA boardthis weekdid not say Iran was so close to a nuclear weapon. It said it had been unable to see aspects of Iran’s civil nuclear programme, and believed Tehran had repeatedly failed to cooperate, particularly over its past secret nuclear programme.

It concluded that it could not verify that Iran’s civil nuclear programme was exclusively civilian. But it did not say Iran was on the verge of a nuclear weapon.

The IAEA report looks at Iran’s progress towards building a bomb, its level of cooperation with UN inspectors and its stockpiles of enriched uranium.

On the first point, the IAEA has since 2019 been examining Iranian human-made uranium particles at three undeclared locations in Iran: Varamin, Marivan and Turquz Abad. This was part of an Iranian nuclear programme codenamed Amad, which has been known about for years and is believed to have ended in 2003.

The report concluded that “these three locations, and other possible related locations, were part of an undeclared structured nuclear programme carried out by Iran until the early 2000s and that some activities used undeclared nuclear material”.

The IAEA director, Rafael Grossi, told the board: “Unfortunately, Iran has repeatedly either not answered, or not provided technically credible answers to, the agency’s questions. It has also sought to sanitise the locations, which has impeded agency verification activities.”

The IAEA concluded that aftersuccessful implosion tests, Iran had intended to proceed with cold tests – conducted with a fully assembled bomb with a core of natural or depleted uranium rather than one of weapons-grade uranium – and had been conducting blast shielding tests in preparation.

Together these conclusions appear to confirm the breadth of Iran’s previously disclosed nuclear programme, suggesting also that this knowledge will not have been lost in the Iranian scientific community.

On the second issue – access to sites – the IAEA report states it is not being given the access it requires, and has not been shown plans for new nuclear facilities. Since February 2021, Iran has denied IAEA access to recorded data from centrifuge production plants. Although a few cameras were reinstalled at centrifuge production plants in May 2023, the agency still cannot access the recordings.

From the Iranian perspective, all these steps were permissible countermeasures to Trump’s2018 withdrawal from the nuclear deal.

On the third point, the report found that Iran had been accumulating a stockpile of highly enriched uranium way beyond the levels set out in the 2015 nuclear agreement. Iran’s stockpile of 60%-enriched uranium had grown from 274.8kg in early February to 408.6kg, an increase of about 50%. This is enough fuel for nine warheads, depending on how much highly enriched uranium is in the finished core of each nuclear weapon.

The IAEA report concluded that it had “no credible indications of an ongoing, undeclared structured nuclear programme” and noted that senior Iranian officials had said that the use of nuclear weapons was incompatible with Islamic law.

But it also pointed to statements from former Iranian officials who suggested that Tehran now had all the capabilities to manufacture nuclear weapons.

“While safeguarded enrichment activities are not forbidden in and of themselves, the fact that Iran is the only non-nuclear-weapon state in the world that is producing and accumulating uranium enriched to 60% remains a matter of serious concern,” it said.

Asked in April when Iran might be capable of weaponising its missile warheads, Grossi said: “Dates are always arbitrary. But they are not far. It would be, you know, a matter of months, not years.”

‘The sky is red and we fear more attacks’: Iranians left stunned by Israeli strikes

Everyday people taken by surprise by overnight strikes and left wondering how to prepare for what may come next

As dawn broke over Tehran, firefighters and other rescue workers saw for the first time the full extent of the damage done by overnight Israeli strikes.

Among the first locations reached by responders in the capital was a 12-storey block of flats looming above a road junction and a shopping mall in the northern suburbs. A huge blast at around 4am had gutted two upper levels, showering debris into the street below.

It soon became clear why this particular floor on this particular block had been selected by Israeli military planners. It was the home ofAli Shamkhani, one of the country’s most senior security officials and a close aide of the supreme leader, Ali Khamenei.

Initial reports said Shamkhani, who is also a key negotiator in ongoing indirect talks with the US over Iran’s nuclear programme, was injured. But by mid-morning it was announced that the 69 year old had been killed.

By then, it was clear thatIsrael’s attack was on a much greater scalethan anyone had previously envisaged. Dozens of other targets in and around Tehran had been hit by warplanes. Across the capital, buildings were burning, with gaping blackened holes where flats had existed hours before.

Othertop officialshad been killed in this first wave of strikes, including Mohammad Bagheri, the chief of staff of Iran’s armed forces, and Maj Gen Hossein Salami, the head of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, who died in an attack on the IRGC’s headquarters.

Other casualties included officials in charge of Iran’s nuclear programme and its ballistic missile arsenal, including two well-known scientists. There were reports of further deaths and injuries, possibly among members of the dead men’s families, though no confirmed numbers.

Golnar, a resident of Saadat Abad, northern Tehran, was asleep when blasts woke her just after 3am.

“I woke up to the first explosion and rushed to the windows to check. Then minutes later I heard four explosions back to back … The windows were shaking and people in the building started screaming,” Golnar told the Guardian.

“We knew from social media that tensions were heightened between Israel and the regime, but we were not told by the authorities that we must prepare. Everything happened so quickly. We were scrambling for information on whether this was an attack or a natural disaster,” she said.

A human rights activist living near Shahr Ara Street in Tehran described “total chaos in the residential areas”.

“Traffic jams and clueless crowds are still trying to make sense of what’s happening,” they said. “Smoke is still billowing from residential streets and there’s debris around homes. The sky is red and we fear there will be more attacks,” they said.

Elsewhere in Iran, people were also waking up to destruction.

Drivers could see plumes of oily black smoke pouring from the major nuclear facility ofNatanz,200 miles (320km) south of Tehran. Residents of the north-western city of Tabriz ran for shelter as several targets were hit. Others cowered as missiles slammed into a suspected nuclear site in the central city of Arak and amid blasts at air defence missile bases in Kermanshah, close to the border with Iraq.

There were strikes in Hamadan province, where a long-range radar facility appeared to have been badly damaged; and at Piranshahr, in West Azerbaijan Province, a launch site for ballistic missiles was hit.

For many Iranians, often unaware they are living next to critical military or nuclear infrastructure, the attacks prompted great fear.

Among those opposed to the regime, the attacks prompted excitement, even jubilation.

An emergency unit doctor in Tehran said mid-morning that no civilian casualties had been brought into his hospital so far.

“Some of us in the emergency units have to cancel any planned leaves, and hospitals have been put on high alert. My elderly father woke up to loud explosions in western Tehran. He called me with a trembling voice, and for the past six months we have lived in fear that tensions will escalate,” the doctor said.

Israel has said the attacks were just the opening salvo of a much broader offensive, which could continues for days, or even weeks.

“We are already dealing with a dire economic crisis,” the human rights activist said. “We are stocking up on food and supplies which are already expensive. Where do we even flee to if attacked again today? We don’t have bomb shelters like the Israelis do and we can’t flee to Iraq or Afghanistan. We are stuck.”

Azadeh, a resident of Vanak, said everyday Iranians had not asked for this war.

“Around 3.40am, the explosion sounds started getting louder and louder. It got very frightening. There were loud screams across the streets. The explosion was near the main square which is scary.

“However, [after] the news that IRGC commanders were killed and not civilians, some of us are happy about it. The mullahs are responsible for any civilian deaths that may occur this time,” Azadeh said.

Though images of the aftermath of strikes suggested there were at least some casualties among the families and neighbours of targeted individuals, the overall death toll was unclear. Iranian state media were reported to have given an unofficial total of at least 78 people killed and more than 300 injured in Tehran.

Iran’s Atomic Energy Organisation said most of the damage from strikes targeting its Natanz facility was at ground level and there had been “no casualties” there.

Some analysts say the attacks will prompt people to rally behind the regime, but others argue that Iran’s inability to either protect its own senior officials and infrastructure or, so far, strike back effectively will damage its credibility among the wider population.

None of the 100 armed drones reportedly launched by Iran at Israel on Friday reached their targets, Israeli officials said. Iran’s state news agency denied any such attempted attack.

Journalists in Iran told the Guardian they had been instructed not to share any news, images and videos on social media by the authorities, and editors had been warned off reposting phone footage from witnesses to the strikes.

“The only videos shared should be [emphasising] how devastating Israel’s attacks were on the innocent people,” said a reporter in Karaj, west of Tehran. “The problem with this is, there are no ground reports for now that civilians were killed or seriously injured. The [authorities] don’t want to look weak in front of radical supporters. Only the state media’s assigned reporters are allowed on the explosion sites.”

Israel has said its attack was essentialbecause Iran was on the brink of acquiring nuclear weapons capability. Iran has repeatedly denied such intentions, saying it wants nuclear energy only for civilian purposes, and has publicly rejected Washington’s demand to scrap enrichment, describing it as an attack on its national sovereignty.

The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said he hoped the attacks would trigger the downfall of Iran’s theocracy, and that his message to the Iranian people was that Israel’s fight was not with them, but with the “brutal dictatorship that has oppressed you for 46 years”.

Khamenei said in a statement after the first strikes that Israel had “unleashed its wicked and bloody” hand in a crime against Iran and thatit would face “a bitter fate”.

The human rights activist in Tehran said ordinary people would “bear the consequences of anything that happens in the next hours and days”.

Israel’s air might and Iran’s nuclear bunkers may make for lengthy conflict

Lightning air strikes have weakened Iran’s military leadership, but its nuclear facilities are deeply defended

Middle East crisis – live updates

Israel’s assault on Iran demonstrates a ruthless combination of air power and intelligence – and a significant disparity between the two countries in a conflict that is likely to be a long one if the goal is to eliminate Tehran’s nuclear capability.

Israel’s air forceundertook waves of airstrikes, beginning at about 3am on Friday, aimed, briefings indicated, first at Iran’s military leaders and intelligence in Tehran, then switching to air defence batteries, missile launch sites and, above all, the critical facility at Natanz where uranium can be enriched to weapons grade.

The initial goal appears to have been to smash Iran’s military chain of command, with the killing of Maj Gen Mohammad Bagheri, the chief of staff of Iran’s military – and Gen Hossein Salami, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, killed alongside other senior members of the group.

Burcu Ozcelik, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi), said the sheer scale of the attack “risks reshaping the strategic landscape of the Middle East” by targeting its military leadership and nuclear infrastructure.

“The sheer depth and precision of the strikes – reaching into the heart of Tehran and eliminating key figures such as Salami – underscore the extent of Israeli intelligence penetration and the degraded state of Iran’s air defence systems. For Tehran, this is not only a tactical loss but a profound strategic humiliation,” she added.

The immediate question is how much damage was done at Natanz, where Iran has conducted most of its nuclear enrichment at a site thought to be 8 metres underground, largely protected by reinforced concrete and hard rock. Videos showed black plumes emerging from the area of the site, but damage is impossible to assess.

Iran said the Natanz site had been hit, but there were no casualties, according to the semi-official Mehr news agency, while the International Atomic Energy Agency said it was still assessing the damage. Meanwhile, Israel’s military spokesperson, Effie Defrin, said the bombing had struck the underground area and related critical infrastructure. “We inflicted significant damage on this site,” he added.

At the same time, Israel’s external security service, the Mossad, claimed it had conducted a mixture of commando attacks, complete withgrainy thermal video, and strikes from prepositioned drones – in the style of Ukraine’s recent attack on Russian airbases – aimed at Iranian air defence systems, including at Esfejabad airbase.

Some of the Mossad claims are likely to be propagandistic but the military reality is that so far there has been no sign of effective Iranian air defence or any reports of Israeli air force casualties. Israel appears to have a near total air superiority, allowing it to continue bombing into Friday with fresh attacks on Tabriz.

Iran’s initial response, Israel said, was to launch more than 100 drones at its attacker, all of which were shot down by mid morning. The drones are slow-moving, taking up to seven hours to travel the 700 miles or so between the countries – and it would take a far larger wave before even a handful hit the ground.

Tehran does have other military options, however. The most immediately dangerous is a store of up to 3,000 high-speed ballistic missiles, of which it used about 180 in its last attack on Israel in October 2024.Two dozen or sohit the Nevatim and Tel Nof airbases (where nuclear weapons are thought to be stored) in Israel and locations near the Mossad headquarters, but the damage done appears to have been relatively modest.

Get a different world view with a roundup of the best news, features and pictures, curated by our global development team

Initial reports suggested that Kermanshah in western Iran, home to ballistic missile launch sites buried inside canyons, was one of the early sites targeted. Successfully destroying or disabling underground sites is notoriously difficult, however, and the true impact will emerge only if Iran launches a missile counterattack with whatever is left at its military’s disposal.

Alternative possibilities may be cyber or terror attacks, though on a political level neither might feel like an equivalent retaliatory response, even if they are achievable – while strikes on American targets would be very risky for Tehran, bringing with it the possibility that the US, with all its firepower, would join the war.

But the option that is not on the table is to rely on traditional regional proxies. On Friday, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, its leadership eliminated during the two-month war with Israel last autumn, said it “will not initiate its own attack on Israel” in support of Iran. Yemen’s Houthis,attacked by Israel on Tuesday, are more than 1,000 miles distant and have only the ability to mount occasional ballistic missile attacks.

The complication for Israel is that Iran has had a long time to prepare, and its nuclear facilities are well defended.Until Friday afternoon, Israel did not try to attack a second enrichment facility at Fordow, buried 80-90 metres underground, beyond the capabilities of its most powerful known missiles, the 1.8-tonne Rocks and 1.6-tonne Air Lora.

Successfully attacking Natanz,according to an analysisfrom Rusi, “would likely require several impacts into the same crater to ‘burrow’ down to the facility and get a weapon through to explode within it successfully” – while the destruction of Fordow is considered feasible only with the US GBU 57/B “bunker buster” bomb, which, because it weighs nearly 14 tonnes and is 6 metres long,can be launched only from US B-2 bombers.

Such hardened targets, combined with Israel’s air dominance and extraordinary confidence, point to an extended military campaign against Iran – two weeks long, according to some reports – as well as a tense and uncertain international period, which, absent an Iranian capitulation, may not have an obvious end point.

‘I support it completely’: Israelis back attack on Iran even as retaliatory missiles hit Tel Aviv

At least three people killed in wave of Iranian attacks as handful of warheads slip through Israeli air defences

Live updates: Israel and Iran exchange missile strikes with explosions heard in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Tehran

Iranian missiles hit Israel as Netanyahu threatens Tehran with more ‘on the way’

At midnight on Friday Sveta’s four-year-old daughter was asleep on the floor outside their shattered apartment block, as the rest of the family weighed up where they should spend the night.

A missile from the firstIranian salvo fired at Tel Avivhad landed a couple of blocks away, killing at least one person, injuring at least 16 others and damaging hundreds of shops and homes in this quiet residential area.

The 37-year-old was sanguine about her own losses, and backed the government decision to attackIraneven though it had so quickly cost her family their home.

“I support it completely,” she said as her older daughter stroked their chihuahua. “This is nothing compared to what they will be able to do if they get their hand on the A-bomb [nuclear weapons]. We can’t afford for the Iranians to get them.

“We tell [our daughters] that as long as we go to the shelter together, everything is OK. The damage in the house is just material things.”

The family’s street, in a residential area of Ramat Gan town east of Tel Aviv, was busy with emergency services crunching over shattered glass and other wreckage to reach the building that took a direct hit.

It had been reduced to layers of concrete rubble and twisted steel, with an apparently undamaged cabinet hanging incongruously from the remains of the first floor.

Two hours after the explosion, rescue teams were still searching through the wreckage for survivors, as a drone buzzed overhead.

At the edge of the police cordon Bar, 31, begged to be let back into her building to pick up a few things for her children. It was still standing, beyond the crumpled remains of several cars, but emergency workers said it was too dangerous to enter.

The family escaped the bombing because they were staying with her parents. Bar recognised her home on the news as reporters arrived at the impact site, and after the all-clear came back to check on their apartment.

“They told me I can’t go in because of the damage,” she said. “I’m anxious and in shock, and the kids are very scared. We have nowhere to go, no home to go back to.”

Residents of nearby buildings walked past dragging suitcases and weighed down with backpacks. Most were leaving to stay with friends and relatives, because the city government had declared a mass casualty event and was only offering camp beds in a nearby school.

A few hundred metres down the road Orly, 27, was helping a friend sweep up shattered glass from the window of a friend’s beauty salon.

“You see what a ballistic missile does? We are hundreds of metres away here,” she said. “We were in the shelter when it hit and you felt it. I’ve been through a couple of wars now and I knew this was different.”

Two more waves of missiles followed before dawn, and both times a handful of Iran’s warheads slipped through layers of Israeli and allied air defences to hit across centralIsrael.

At least three people were killed across Israel and more than 40 injured, emergency services reported early on Saturday. It was the most intense and deadly few hours inside Israel since the Hamas cross-border attacks on 7 October 2023 that triggered the war in Gaza, but the toll was dwarfed by the damage that Israel inflicted on Iran.

Elia Digma, 18, lives near a high-rise residential building in central Tel Aviv that was hit in the first salvo. He felt the impact even in an underground shelter and had come to inspect the damage.

“It’s a miracle only five people were hurt here,” he said. “It was one hell of a boom, and everything shook.”

It was shocking to see the fallout of a missile hitting the heart of his city, Elia said, and he was braced for more attacks. But, like Sveta, he was confident the pre-emptive attack on Iran had been necessary.

“We are doing what we need to defend ourselves,” Elia said. “The Bible says if someone comes to kill you, you must kill them first. We are ready for anything and everything that will bring quiet.”

Israel and Iran exchange missile strikes with explosions heard in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Tehran – live

Hello and welcome to our live coverage of the Middle East, where Iran has launched a wave of retaliatory attacks afterIsraelkilled scores of people and injured hundreds in a surprise attack on Friday morning that it claimed was aimed at preventing its arch enemy from developing a nuclear weapon.

Explosions were heard over Jerusalem and Tel Aviv early on Saturday. Two people were reported to have been killed, one in Tel Aviv in an attack on Friday night and one in central Israel on Saturday morning. InIran, fresh explosions were reported at an airport in Tehran that houses an air force base, and across the Hakimiyeh and Tehranpars neighbourhoods in the east of the capital.

The Israeli military said its air defence systems were operating. “In the last hour, dozens of missiles have been launched at the state of Israel from Iran, some of which were intercepted,” the Israeli military said.

Rescue teams were working at a number of locations across the country where fallen projectiles were reported, it said.

In Iran, several explosions were heard in the capital, Tehran, the semi-official Tasnim news agency reported. The Fars news agency said two projectiles hit Tehran’s Mehrabad airport, and Iranian media said flames were reported there. Close to key Iranian leadership sites, the airport hosts an air force base with fighter jets and transport aircraft.

Israeli media said a suspected missile came down in Tel Aviv, and a loud boom was reported in Jerusalem.

Iran’s envoy to the UN security council, Amir Saeid Iravani, said 78 people including senior officials had been killed in the Israeli attacks on Friday, and that more than 320 were injured, most of them civilians. He said the US was complicit in the attacks and accused Israel of seeking “to kill diplomacy, to sabotage negotiations and to drag the region into wider conflict”.

The US role in the attackremained murkywith President Donald Trump giving conflicting accounts as to his approval and foreknowledge. In the run-up to the Israeli 200-plane attack, Trump had publicly urged Israel to give diplomacy more of a chance, before US-Iranian talks that were planned for Sunday. But on Friday, the US president insisted he had been well informed of Israel’s plans and described the Israeli attack as “excellent”.

Iran launched a fresh wave of attacks on Israel early on Saturday, state media said, after Israel’s military reported it detected inbound missiles from Iran. “New round of Honest Promise 3 attacks,” state television reported, referring to the name of the Iranian military operation against Israel.

Israel’s ambulance service said 34 people were injured on Friday night in the Tel Aviv area, most with minor injuries. Police later said one person had died. On Saturday Israeli media quoted emergency services as saying one person had been killed and 19 injured by a direct Iranian strike on an area in central Israel.

A top-level UN conference on a two-state solution forIsraeland the Palestinians scheduled for next week has been postponed, French president Emmanuel Macron said on Friday.France and Saudi Arabia had been due to co-chair the conference hosted by the UN general assembly in New York on 17-20 June, and Macron had been among leaders scheduled to attend.

Dozens of Palestinians were killed and injured after Israeli forces opened fire on people waiting to receive aid near a checkpoint north of Nuseirat, Al Jazeera reporter Anas al-Sharif and Drop Site News reported, in thelatest such massacre. More Palestinians were killed when Israeli gunboats targets the tents of displaced people on a beach north-west of Gaza City, al-Sharif reported. It was impossible to independently verify the reports as Israel has barred foreign journalists from entering the territory. It has also cut off internet to Gaza since Thursday.

Israel closed all checkpoints to the Israeli-occupied West Bank as the country attacked Iran, a military official said Friday. The move sealed off entry and exit to the territory, meaning that Palestinians could not leave without special coordination.

‘The risk was worth it’: All Fours author Miranda July on sex, power and giving women permission to blow up their lives

The artist and author’s hit book had so much in common with her own life that even her friends forgot it wasn’t real. How did this revolutionary portrayal of midlife desire come to inspire a generation of women?

When Miranda July’sAll Fourswas published in May last year, it triggered what felt like both a spontaneous resistance movement and the sort of mania last experienced when the final Twilight book dropped, except this time for women in midlife rather than teenage girls. Two friends separately brought it to my house, like contraband dropped out of a biplane. Book groups hastily convened, strategically timed for when the men were out of the picture.

The story opens with a 45-year-old woman about to take a road trip, a break from her husband and child and general domestic noise. She’s intending to drive from LA to New York, but is derailed in the first half hour by a young guy, Davey, in a car hire place, to whom she is passionately attracted. The next several weeks pass in a lust so intense, so overpowering, so lusciously drawn, it’s like a cross between ayahuasca and encephalitis. The narrator is subsumed by her obsession, and disappears her normal life. The road trip is a bust from the start, but the effort of breaking the spell and going home looks, for a long time, like way too much for the narrator, and when she finally does, to borrow from Leonard Cohen (perhaps describing a similar situation), she’s somebody’s mother but nobody’s wife.

The New York Times called it “the first great perimenopause novel”, which is incorrect – not because you could easily name 10 others, rather because what it ignited was not an honest heart-to-heart about hormones, but something far more radical. What if a woman just told the truth, about sex, monogamy, marriage, mortality, domesticity, friendship, the life of the mind? The disruption of norms would be so immense that you wouldn’t, as a reader, necessarily need your circumstances or feelings to correspond to the author’s for that to upend your life. One woman who nearly divorced her husband after reading it said: “I think what I felt, which I think is what a lot of us feel, is permission to be undone.”

All Fourswas an immediate success. It spent nearly a year on the Indie Bestseller list. It was afinalist in the National Book Awardsin the US, as well as being named on the best books lists, 2024, by the New York Times, the New Yorker, Time, the Washington Post, PBS, Oprah, Vogue and Vulture.

Now, a year on, the paperback is coming out, and I’m talking to July as she waits to find out whether she has won the Women’s prize . Our conversation, which would normally be part-retrospective – there’s a funny bit in All Fours when she talks about the female artist’s lifecycle: first “hot young thing”, then wilderness years, and a final spurt of attention before you die – is instead all about the reaction to this book. “I wrote it as if it was OK – as if everyone knew what I was talking about,” July says, looking bluestockingy in round glasses, from her home in Echo Park, Los Angeles. “As if you could make a joke about something shameful, as if we had all already talked about that thing. Even though we hadn’t. So it was skipping a few steps, even to have humour about it. I was building on an internal world that I believed existed, not just in me.”

Miranda July is 51, was born in Vermont to two writer parents, and has the ultimate boho CV – she said once that her last shitty job was at the age of 23, as a car-door-unlocker at Pop-A-Lock, a US chain of locksmiths, which makes her ability to make a living as, variously, a performance artist, a film-maker, a writer, almost mythical. She came to indie prominence withMe and You and Everyone We Know,her first full-length film, in 2005 – it won the best first feature at Cannes that year. It has the most endearing, infuriating sequence: someone buys a goldfish and ­accidentally drives off, having left it on top of his car. July, starring in the film because, realistically, she was the only person who could have, decides from inside her own car that the fish will certainly perish, and delivers an ode: “I didn’t know you, but I want you to know that you were loved.” Her voice was incredibly distinctive – she nailed all those universal feelings such as awkwardness, futility, delight, yet was as far as you could imagine from being an everywoman. There followed an exquisite book of short stories –No One Belongs Here More Than You– in 2007, and her first full-length novel,The First Bad Man, in 2015.

Certainly, she always blurred the lines between herself and her protagonists. But When All Fours was published, it couldn’t escape anyone’s notice that July herself has a child, roughly the same age as the narrator’s, and separated from her husband two years before the book’s publication. Of course, it’s always assumed that authors borrow from life, but this seemed like a different order of autobiographical fiction. Being honest about feelings, even destructive, primitive, contradictory, overwhelming ones, is daring enough, but marrying them to real-life events felt cataclysmic, which almost created a feedback loop. Readers felt the story was so audacious it had to be true.

They were invested in the truth of it, to the extent that, during a Q&A after a reading, “someone asked about Davey being a dancer, why was he?” says July. “And I went through the whole thing of my process, why I came up with that, and I could just feel the room kind of deflate. They wanted him to be a real dancer.”

“My actual friends,” July says, her voice rising in mock outrage, “they know that so much of this didn’t happen. It definitely didn’t happen the way it’s written in the book. But even as I was talking to a writer friend, she said, ‘I keep forgetting that you didn’t just do what you did in the book. You had years of couples therapy and this long conversation with your husband, it’s totally different.’ And I was, like, ‘Are you kidding me?’ You have to hold that in your head. How is anyone else going to believe this isn’t real, if my friends can’t even remember?”

What about her ex, though – Mike Mills, also a film-maker, Oscar-nominated in 2017 for his movie20th Century Women? Did he mind, or was he fine with it? July looks at me sardonically. “I don’t think those are the only two conceivable feelings.”

The pair met at Sundance film festival in 2005, both there with their first movies. “So we met as artists, and we always talked about how there’s this bubble that’s sacred for each of us, you keep the bubbles separate. You know, you each get your own world, and you have your freedom within that. And so it’s not like it’s always easy, and for sure, there were parts of this that were hard. There’s a part of it that was very personal for him – this is the mother of my child, we’ll know each other for ever. And then there’s the part that’s a fellow artist. I remember him saying to me, ‘I think you’re at your best when you’re closest to the bone as a writer.’ So it’s not great, it’s not safe, but that was helpful to me to hear. I felt like the risk was worth it. The reward for not risking it seemed too modest.”

A couple of months in from the publication of All Fours, everyone had a story about a woman who’d read it and blown her life up. But if you took a stroll through Goodreads, which is a kind of all-comers citizen book review site, something else stuck out: the people who one-starred it (about 5% of almost 140,000) didn’t just hate it, there were actively angry with it. The rage was fascinating. It was as if they’d been slapped. Many were angry at how graphic it was (there’s a famous, sexy scene with a tampon that would probably be a spoiler to describe). Commenters took umbrage. “It would be great if I could read a book by a well-known female author who wasn’t under the impression that descriptions of cutting matted hair from a dog’s ass or running her hands under her lover’s pee was ‘original’, ‘sharp’, or ‘illuminating’ writing,” wrote one. Many prefaced their scorn with the belief that women’s bodies were brilliant territory for a writer – uncharted, tumultuous, mysterious – just not like this. This gave them the ick.

More than that, though, they were angry with the narrator, and nowhere was the conflation of fiction and fact more complete; if she was narcissistic, self-involved, “immature” then so was July. “Yeah, I need to talk about that with someone,” July says, “probably not you.” (I wish it could be me, but it sounds like she means a therapist.)

Sometimes, it’s just that they weren’t expecting it – “They thought it was going to be a beach read.” But more importantly, “They’re very sympathetic to the husband.” Of course, it’s that – no question, he is betrayed by the narrator, not just with this brain fever emotional infidelity, but on an even more basic level; it’s that he’s so nice, so personable, so thoughtful, so empathetic, and yet … he’s not enough. “And I’m thinking, ‘I created the husband, too! So he’s also me!’” she says, laughing. This is possibly the most radical act of the book: not a woman getting divorced, but a woman leaving a Good Guy.

The husband gets annoyed just once: when the narrator posts a photo of herself on Instagram, dancing suggestively. This section, which follows a period where the narrator works out in the gym and strives for a perfect physique, surprised me – it’s such a mainstream thing to do. It’s not a thousand miles from real life, either, as July also likes to uploads videos of herself shaking her insanely perfect, pretty much unshakeable ass (though fair play, the dances themselves are anything but mainstream). Today, July bristles a bit at the suggestion her character is in thrall to a beauty ideal when admiring her ass. “No, she’s been taking nude selfies, and then she’s surprised to see, ‘Hold on, it does look a little different down there.’ I think that’s what I was trying to capture.” Then she elaborates: “If ever I have something to do with fashion, or frankly, even if I just get quite dressed up and I’m photographed because I enjoy that, I do have conversations with other prominent women writers that are like, ‘I make sure that no one sees me having too good a time.’ I think, for women, the measurement of what seriousness looks like is still masculine.”

Discover new books and learn more about your favourite authors with our expert reviews, interviews and news stories. Literary delights delivered direct to you

In November last year, July launched herSubstack. It became a muster point for people who relished talking about the book, but an unusual number had also made a great change in their lives after reading it. What was interesting, when Iinterviewed some of them, was the sheer range of situations. There were readers who didn’t need an LA literary novelist and performance artist to tell them they were allowed their own feelings – readers who were already queer or polyamorous or non-binary, who nevertheless found a new permission to just get out of whatever situation they were in, forgo the security of a relationship for something more authentic and exploratory. There were readers who were from incredibly conservative backgrounds. There were women who didn’t leave their relationship, who simply left a job in which they felt no appreciation. There were women who changed the way they had sex. There were women who changed the way they related to their children, changed the time or attention they gave to friendships. We weren’t looking at a divorce manual, in other words, but “permission to be undone”. No wonder some people were angry. That is an incredibly dangerous licence, socially. A lot of things really rely on women who’ll hold it together for others, regardless of their own feelings.

July says that the scale of readers’ responses has felt like more than an unusual wave of appreciation for a previously respected but niche artist and writer. “I had this movie [Me and You and Everyone We Know], that was the big change for me,” she says. “That experience was really about me, a new voice. All Fours is really about women. Reading and hearing about other people’s stories – the sense of isolation, the shame that I had while I was writing the book, it’s all been completely inverted.”

This is one of the reasons “perimenopause novel” irks, as a thumbnail – situating these explosive feelings hormonally is just another way to say these feelings will pass, so don’t matter. But July is relaxed about that. “There have been different phases of shame and fear while I’m writing – there was more shame when I was younger. Then I got to the perimenopause and that was the last thing I wanted to be associated with. All the time I was writing, I was just thinking, ‘Why am I doing this? I can’t stop myself.’” The menopause conversation is much more developed in the UK than the US, she says, where nobody talks about it. “You could have a whole relationship with your gynaecologist and really not have it come up. Or you could say, ‘I have these symptoms,’ and they’d say, ‘If you’re suicidal, you can take hormones, but otherwise just ride it out.’ And that’s in LA!” It makes me think of all the other ways in which women in the US are peculiarly under-emancipated – not the recent, terrifying anti-abortion legislation, but the bread-and-butter stuff, such as the lack of significant maternity leave; does that feel connected? “I think it’s very intertwined with the healthcare system. We just don’t have reliable healthcare, period. So menopause is a luxury problem.”

She notes, wryly, that “we don’t actually have a problem with rich, aspirational women” as protagonists, they just can’t be dissatisfied. It’s funny: on a Zoom she looks younger than her age, but not artificially so, or massively groomed; but in public, I’ve always found her stunning appearance incongruous, like, how can this woman feel out of place?

July’s The First Bad Man is 10 years old now, and even though it is mainly powered by sexual fantasies, they are so extravagantly weird that, when I read it, I didn’t even realise it was meant to be erotic. (That was partly context – literary erotic fiction wasn’t really a thing, then. You were either a Fifty Shades reader or you read grown-up stuff.) It wasn’t until July spoke at a book festival and described how she was masturbating so much while working on the book that her writer-friend said she had to sublimate, the way athletes do, or she was never going to finish it. Which was news to the audience just because, you know, who’s ever heard “I was masturbating … ” at a book festival?

Technically, All Fours is a work of erotic fiction, which has a definition: that the sex doesn’t just happen, the characters are advanced by it. At the same time, it’s not a sex-beach-read, because that’s not July’s style. “Sometimes I pick up a book at the top of the bestseller lists, just to understand what’s going on,” she says. “I’m reading a romcom called Funny Story. I was shocked by how graphic it is … I don’t think I’m prudish, I was a sex worker at times in my life.”

All Fours aims to do something different. “The joy of it, for me, was writing a thing I hadn’t seen written about sex, either because what constituted sex was new, or because nobody had ever described, like, a woman who takes a long time to come; the thoughts of the other person: is this a fool’s errand? Will I be able to do this? It was just really funny to me: ‘Tell me if you need a vibrator, tell me if I’m just gonna keep going at this. You know, if it’s humanly possible.’”

Yet this definitely isn’t slapstick sex; it’s meant, and felt. The narrator and her friend make a rigid distinction between mind-rooted fuckers and body-rooted fuckers – mind-fuckers are imagining a scene as they have sex (in one memorable description between the narrator and her husband, she says it’s like she stuck a giant TV to his head); body-fuckers are absolutely engrossed in the sensations of the body, their mind is nowhere – and there’s a memorable scene for that, too.

What was the reason, creatively, that the narrator and Davey never have sex? “The point was to build it to this place where you felt like those were the only two options: she’s either going to have sex or she’s going to go home. I wanted to use all that built-up energy, that obsessive loop, so another way of thinking would present itself. That playing field, while it’s completely addictive to read about – and to live, frankly – is ultimately quite small. But it can be transformative, it can push you into the next area of your life. If the end result is that you fuck Davey, you might not get that birth of complexity.” Then she says the most surprisingly romantic thing. “When someone sees you, in a particular way, and that part of your soul that hasn’t really been seen is seen, it won’t go back into the box. And that’s a big problem, because your life isn’t built for it to come out of the box.”

We speak before July travels to the UK for the Women’s prize. “Sometimes people will tip you off that you’re not gonna win. I’ve been looking for that email, and haven’t had it yet. But the important thing about this book is what it’s done to the conversation, for the culture. I don’t know if that’s the thing literary prizes are for.” ( In the end,she lost out toDutch debut novelist Yael van der Wouden.)

It must feel strange and vulnerable, at this moment, to be an author who stands for – maybe not everything, but a huge amount of things that the US government absolutely cannot tolerate, whether that’s female emancipation or sexual and gender fluidity. “I tend to think the people who are most vulnerable to this are not so visible. What’s the deal with my neighbours? I’ve known them for 20 years, but I don’t know who’s here legally, why would I know their business? Who’s gonna notice if two of the people in that house are gone?” But it does touch her personally, and not just as a neighbour. “It’s really hard to get a grip on,” she says sadly. “Whether the most extreme takes are actually the most clear-eyed. Whether the people who are moving [abroad] have it right. I’m trying to figure that out right now.”

Unlike her narrator, July did make it to New York, last week, where she entertained her friends in her hotel room (which will, if you’ve read it, remind you a lot of All Fours). This is how she described the experience on her Substack: “Two of my visiting friends were my age and both of them, in different ways, spoke about looking older, the hardness of that … One friend and I showed each other our thighs in the light to make sure the other one really saw our cellulite. I told her the truth: I had assumed hers was much more extreme because of how she had spoken about it over the years. For years, I had placed her in a different category from myself, cellulite-wise.” And that’s July – the political, the personal, the public, the intimate, the things you’re not supposed to think about if you want to be taken seriously or thought of as truthful, all with a voice that’s entirely relatable yet completely idiosyncratic.

All Fours is out now in paperback (Canongate Books). To support the Guardian, order your copy fromguardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply.

Brian Wilson was a musical genius. Are there any left?

In pop, which equates genius with innovation, recent artists have not pioneered new forms like those from the 60s. Has the digital age sidelined invention and promoted the derivative for ever?

By all accounts, Brian Wilson was a genius. His fellow greats Bob Dylan and Paul McCartney both used the word in their tributes to the creative force behind the Beach Boys, whodied this weekaged 82. So did John Cale, Mick Fleetwood and Elton John. And so did Wilson’s bandmates, who wrote in a joint statement: “The world mourns a genius today.”

You may imagine Wilson gradually accrued such a vaunted standing. Artistic legacy is largely dependent on the longevity of mass appeal, and the fact that the Beach Boys’ opusPet Soundsremains one of the most celebrated and beloved records of all time almost 60 years since its release is proof enough of his incredible talent.

Wilson’s claim to genius status began with a 1966 PR campaign masterminded by the ex-Beatles publicist Derek Taylor. Fortunately, Wilson’s output justified it, and after spreading like wildfire through the British music press the “Brian Wilson is a genius” rhetoric quickly caught on, “especially with the UK public”, says Wilson’s biographer, David Leaf. It has been the consensus ever since.

Do we just imagine musical geniuses are anointed in retrospect because we no longer have any? It is extremely difficult to argue that any artist of the last 30 years has reached the trailblazing standard of Wilson, Dylan, the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Joni Mitchell and David Bowie. The remaining members of those acts are all over 80 (with the sole exception of Ronnie Wood at 78); Stevie Wonder is 75, Brian Eno is 77, Ralf Hütter, the surviving founder of Kraftwerk, is 78.

The most recent claimants to the musical genius title are generally considered to have been Michael Jackson and Prince, both of whom died relatively young. Soon, the very idea of a living legend will be a thing of the past.

In pop music, which reveres the new, genius is synonymous with innovation. Obviously, it is no coincidence that all of our unique and innovative musical minds were of a similar generation, starting work in the 1970s – at the very latest – when all the new drum, guitar and keyboard sounds and most resonant, memorable melodies were there for the taking. Such was the virgin territory before them, theBeach Boyseven had the opportunity to sonically codify California, one of the most culturally significant places on the planet.

“I guess I just wasn’t made for these times,” Wilson once sang. But if he hadn’t been operating in those lonely years, would he have been considered a genius at all?

What is also quite clear is that musical progress didn’t abruptly end half a century ago. There is still as-yet-unheard music to be made – and made it is, all the time. Generic fusions, formal variations and experimental production techniques are not infinite but they are definitely not exhausted, and some have even coalesced into era-defining movements, as 21st-century genres such as grime, trap and hyperpop prove.

Some genres – including grime, which can be convincingly traced back to the British producer Wiley and his turn-of-the-millennium experiments; and hyperpop, the brainchild of the London producer AG Cook and his PC Music collective – even have specific originators. Yet they still haven’t produced any bona fide musical geniuses.

First, the entirely explicable part. The demise of the monoculture – due to technology’s fracturing of the media and cultural landscape – means only the most aggressively mainstream and inoffensively palatable acts (Adele, Ed Sheeran, Taylor Swift) are able to command the same level of fame and musical familiarity as their 1960s counterparts.

Meanwhile, invention has remained staunchly at the cultural fringes – and if it does get anywhere near the zeitgeist, the journey is leisurely. Grime took off a full decade after its creation, thanks to Skepta and Stormzy; so did hyperpop, which reached the masses last summer in the guise of Charli xcx’s Brat.

This is another reason why musical genius is so thin on the ground: the people who do the actual innovating rarely end up in the spotlight themselves. This seems especially so in comparison with the 1960s; it is impossible to separate personal achievement from the decade’s goldrush – a manic crusade to push pop and rock to its absolute limits.

The famous rivalry between Wilson and the Beatles – healthy competition for the latter, says Leaf, if not so much for the former – accelerated progress and incentivised change. The pressure is also thought to have contributed to the decline in Wilson’s mental health later in the decade.

But then comes the more mysterious part. What is so astonishing about Wilson is how many different groundbreaking things he did simultaneously. In the studio, “he was inventing a new way of making popular music,” Leaf says. “What he called modular recording – recording bits and pieces of a song and then piecing it together.” He also pioneered the idea of one person helming all elements of a recorded song: composition, arrangement, performance, mixing, production.

On top of that, he did something lyrically radical. He transformed pop into an “emotional autobiography,” says Leaf. “He was determined to put his feelings on to the recording tape and share it with the world,” which at that time was very much not the norm. Many of pop’s canonical artists were similar: Dylan didn’t just single-handedly make popular music a vessel for poetry, he also infused it with an all-new attitude and emotional palette (cynicism, disgust, rebellion), while conflating his previous folk fare with rock to create an entirely new sound.

Dylan’s decision to go electric has become emblematic of the musical genius’s requirement to shock. Even Pet Sounds, an onslaught of loveliness, disturbed the band’s record label with its leaps of progress, says Leaf.

Nowadays, pop music is only really controversial where it overlaps with sex and violence; it is practically impossible to sonically surprise the listening public.

The prospect of the end of musical innovation is something students and lovers of guitar music have already had to make peace with – at this point, nostalgia is inherent to the genre. “I’m aware it’s impossible to make genuinely new, novel guitar music, and so I tend to lean into anachronism,” was how Owen Williams, frontman of my new favourite old-sounding band, the Tubs, once put it.

Just as selling out became a respected career move, explicit derivation is now an artform in itself; in recent years Beyoncé has stayed at the forefront of pop by essentially becoming a kind of musical historian.

There is one thing that does feel jarring about the slowed pace of musical progress. Technological advancement has always been woven into sonic novelty – the advent of synths (which Wilson also anticipated), for example, or sampling. Considering technology has accelerated in unimaginable, terrifying ways over the past 20 years, you’d think that might be reflected in the pop zeitgeist.

Instead, we have a chart stuffed with tracks that essentially could have been made at any point in the past 50 years. Perhaps the late 20th century – and particularly the 1960s – created a sort of natural selection of music: we found the combinations of notes and rhythms that appealed most to the western human ear and that is what we have continued to rehash.

Surely, then, this is a problem artificial intelligence may be able to solve. This is technology determined to get to know us more intimately than we know ourselves. What better way to continue the quest for novel pop perfection that Wilson embarked on 60 years ago?

In theory, it could supplant human creativity. In actuality, AI is unlikely to wrest control of pop’s soul from humans. That’s because musical innovation, and even catchy melodies, have ceded importance to the branding of people. If Swift’s gargantuan success is anything to go by – which it probably is – pop’s future depends on the carefully honed appeal of an individual human personalities, not what they can do on a keyboard (the musical kind).

Swift’s approach to her public image and the music business in general is groundbreaking in its own way, even if her music isn’t. We will be mourning her as a cultural figure at some point, but a musical genius? That would take some real cognitive dissonance.

It seems unlikely we will do so with anyone by the end of this century; we have no currently minted visionaries, although time will tell if anyone retroactively earns the title. What is certain is that as the pop canon continues to splinter into thousands of smaller, personal rosters, we will be losing musicians who mean everything to some people, but not – like Wilson – something to almost everyone.

Tidak Ada Lagi Postingan yang Tersedia.

Tidak ada lagi halaman untuk dimuat.