As the Jan. 6 committee prepares for its next hearing, a clear theme is emerging: Former President Donald Trump is singularly responsible for fomenting the attack on the U.S. Capitol. 

Drawing largely on interviews with half a dozen people from Mr. Trump’s inner circle, the hearings so far have portrayed him as a leader who ignored his top advisers’ advice and misled his followers in a bid to overturn a free and fair election and prevent an orderly transfer of power. 

The strategy of making the former president the focal point deflects attention away from the responsibility borne by campaign advisers, social media companies, and Trump supporters themselves for the buildup of anger that erupted in a Capitol riot. That suggests the committee may be trying to give Mr. Trump’s allies a face-saving way to come out against him in greater numbers. Whether that effort succeeds or not, the committee seeks to establish a definitive narrative for posterity that the former president’s actions constitute an unprecedented attempt to subvert American democracy. 

Jennifer Stromer-Galley, an expert on presidential messaging at Syracuse University, says that the best way to counter misinformation like Mr. Trump’s election fraud messaging is by offering a new story or framework. “There is the possibility that over time the narrative that this hearing is advancing will shift the historical narrative about what happened in the 2020 election.”

Though many expected the committee to investigate Mr. Trump’s involvement and piece together what he was doing in the West Wing as police officers battled rioters for hours on Jan. 6, 2021, the laserlike focus on him as the instigator of an attempted coup has surprised even some Democrats.

“Donald Trump’s role is central,” Rep. Pramila Jayapal, head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told the Monitor after watching the June 9 opening hearing in person along with a handful of other members. “I thought maybe that would be something that would sort of emerge – but it was clearly the through-line.”

In a video preview of the next hearing, scheduled for June 16, Republican Vice Chair Liz Cheney said the committee will focus on how Mr. Trump pressured Vice President Mike Pence to challenge the certification of the Electoral College vote – a move she said violated two criminal statutes, citing a ruling by a federal judge.

But while many have found the investigation’s line of inquiry to be bolder and more direct than expected, the committee itself appears split on whether to recommend criminal charges. Nearly a year and a half after the riot, Mr. Trump has not been indicted on any charges related to Jan. 6.

Susan Walsh/AP

Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington talks with U.S. Capitol Police Sgt. Aquilino Gonell (left) on June 9, 2022, during a break in the first public hearing of the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. About a dozen members of Congress and four law enforcement officers who had previously testified before the committee attended the hearing.

“What [Mr. Trump] did was reckless and wrong,” says Jonathan Turley, an expert in constitutional law at George Washington University who testified against Mr. Trump’s first impeachment in 2019. However, he adds, the hearings “have not come close thus far to creating a compelling case for criminal charges.”

William Barr as star witness

The nine-member committee has so far relied heavily on testimony from former Trump officials, perhaps in part to counter criticism that the committee is imbalanced because the two Republican members voted for Mr. Trump’s second impeachment for “incitement of insurrection” after the Capitol riot. 

The first and second hearings showed video clips of committee depositions of members of Mr. Trump’s inner circle. 

House Select Committee/AP

Former Attorney General William Barr was one of half a dozen members of former President Donald Trump's inner circle whose videotaped testimony was shown at a Jan. 6 committee hearing June 13, 2022, on Capitol Hill in Washington.

Former Attorney General William Barr has emerged as the most prominent witness so far, discussing at length Mr. Trump’s allegations of election fraud, which he variously referred to as “complete nonsense,” “bull----,” “crazy stuff,” “idiotic,” “groundless,” “very amateurish,” and “a grave, grave disservice to the country.” He and other Trump insiders have been criticized for being far more forthright with the committee than they were with the public at the time.

The former attorney general described one exchange that took place just hours after he had told The Associated Press he’d seen no evidence of fraud on a scale that would change the election result. Mr. Trump, he said, was as mad as he had ever seen him. The former president insisted there had been a “vote dump” in Detroit, to which the attorney general explained that the city’s 630 precincts sent their ballots to a central location for counting. Mr. Barr said he added, “Did anyone point out to you that you actually did better in Detroit than you did last time?”

Before the election, Mr. Barr said he felt the president could be reasoned with, even if “you sometimes had to engage in a big wrestling match.” But afterward, he said, that was not the case. “I felt very demoralized because if he really believes this, he’s lost contact with – he has become detached from reality.”  

In mid-December 2020, Mr. Barr quit. “I repeatedly told the president in no uncertain terms that I did not see evidence of fraud,” he said in a taped interview broadcast the first night of hearings. “And frankly, a year and a half later, I haven’t seen anything to change my mind.”

Local officials have had a similarly challenging time trying to reason with Trump supporters who believe the election was stolen. A county election official in Pennsylvania who is now facing a citizen-driven push to do a hand recount of the 2020 ballots says it’s frustrating that even after what has been wrongly interpreted as election irregularities gets explained, Trump supporters keep using the same exact talking points. While many have blamed Mr. Trump, this official says another important factor is social media. 

“It makes it possible for people who believe outlandish, ridiculous conspiracy theories to find each other and join together,” says the official, who was granted anonymity so that they could speak more freely about a sensitive issue. “The challenge now as a country is: How do you de-radicalize this many people?” adds the official, who has had little time or energy to watch the hearings.

But was it an “actual coup”?

The committee is seeking to prove that Mr. Trump forged ahead with a plan to disrupt the orderly transition of power based on claims he knew to be false. 

During Monday’s hearing, the committee highlighted courts’ responses to the dozens of election fraud cases brought on Mr. Trump’s behalf. These snippets, which were provided without context, ranged from “hearsay,” “speculation,” and “hazy and nebulous” to “implausible,” “wholly unreliable,” and “without merit.” 

Amid pushback from the courts and his own campaign leadership, Mr. Trump, the committee said, held a late-night session with lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell to explore alternatives to move forward. It was after that meeting that he tweeted:

“Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!”

The committee portrayed the Trump followers who heeded that call as misled – and in many cases robbed of their hard-earned money by fundraising efforts that brought in $250 million for an “official election defense fund” that the committee determined did not exist. As the violence unfolded, Mr. Trump was told that rioters were chanting, “Hang Mike Pence.” According to the committee – which did not name its source – Mr. Trump then responded with the sentiment: Maybe our supporters have the right idea. Mike Pence “deserves it.”

Still, while the hearings have produced new details, the information largely supports what was already known, says Professor Turley.

“What some of us are looking for is evidentiary connections that would support a claim of an actual coup or a plot by the president,” he says. That would include evidence that ties the president to the coordination or encouragement of the subsequent violence beyond implicit encouragement, such as when he told the Proud Boys to “stand down and stand by” in a fall 2020 presidential debate. While Professor Turley condemned Mr. Trump’s address on Jan. 6, he says in his view it was protected free speech and neither that address nor a “reckless” determination to push ahead against the advice of his inner circle would constitute a crime. 

He also disputes the ruling of federal Judge David Carter, which Ms. Cheney referenced in her preview of Thursday’s hearing. In a lawsuit brought by the committee to obtain the emails of Trump legal adviser John Eastman, who had put forward a plan to disrupt certification of the 2020 election, Judge Carter wrote in March, “the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021.”

Thursday’s hearing will examine Mr. Trump’s efforts to pressure Vice President Pence into overturning the election. The committee’s preview of the hearing concludes with former Trump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann relating some “free legal advice” he gave Mr. Eastman the day after Jan. 6: “Get a great effing criminal defense lawyer. You’re going to need it.” 

Ukrainian Presidential Press Service/Reuters

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy welcomes European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen before a meeting, as Russia's attack on Ukraine continues, in Kyiv, Ukraine, on June 11, 2022. The weeks ahead could test the strength of Western nations' support for Ukraine.

How much does Ukraine really matter?

Only weeks ago, the question would have seemed outlandish, when the United States and its European allies seemed poised to intensify efforts to help Kyiv beat back, or even defeat, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s scorched-earth invasion army.

Yet as the war takes a punishing toll on both sides – and the Western alliance faces major new strains and stresses – the issue is assuming key importance.

How the allies decide it will indicate the strength of their perseverance and of their commitment to the core principle behind their strong early response to the invasion: the imperative of defending a fellow democracy against unprovoked assault by an autocratic power bent on its destruction.

While Western governments remain determined to prevent an outright Russian victory, their arms deliveries in the coming weeks will reveal how ready they are to equip Ukraine for a counteroffensive. On the political front, the European Union is set to decide whether to fast-track Ukraine’s request for membership.

On both counts, the authorities in Kyiv are worried they will meet with half-measures or hesitation.

Behind those worries are doubts about the alliance’s longer-term commitment, all the more so in the wake of remarks last week by Mr. Putin signaling his determination to stay in the fight. The Russian leader compared his Ukraine invasion to Czar Peter the Great’s 21-year war against Sweden in the early 1700s, framing both wars as historic moves to “reclaim” rightfully “Slavic” lands.

And an array of intensifying pressures seems to be taxing the alliance’s unity and staying power. The most visible is the variety of opinions about whether the goal is a clear defeat of Mr. Putin or an outcome short of that.

The opinion that really matters – expressing itself through a “coalition of the willing” built around Russia’s Baltic neighbors – is Washington’s. But the United States is not exempt from distractions affecting its allies too.

Stoyan Nenov/Reuters

A United States Marine Corps MV-22 Osprey lands at the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge during the Baltops 22 exercise in the Baltic Sea on June 7, 2022. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has prompted NATO nations to unite with aid for Ukraine, but these nations also face the tug of domestic issues including consumer concern about energy prices.

The first is inherent in democratic societies: the shifting nature of the political agenda. Yes, Ukraine remains a major preoccupation for policymakers in allied capitals. And recent polling has suggested that across Europe, a majority supports NATO doing more to help Ukraine.

But, nearly four months after the Russian invasion, other stories have been nudging the war off the front pages. In France, for example, tightly contested parliamentary elections; in Britain, a new showdown with the EU over Brexit; in America, gun violence and the congressional hearings on last year’s mob assault on the Capitol.

And, across the alliance, the shared crisis that seems most likely to test its long-term resolve: soaring inflation.

It’s the steep rise in the price of energy – to power industries and businesses, or fill up cars at gas stations – that is most alarming consumers. In a number of European countries, that’s directly related to their deliberate effort to wean themselves off dependence on Russian energy imports.

The EU agreed 10 days ago to reduce imports of Russian oil by 90% by the end of this year, though Hungary and Slovakia won exemptions due to their heavy dependence on such energy imports. This has been a major concern for both Ukraine and Washington: EU oil purchases have been funding Mr. Putin’s invasion to the tune of several hundred million dollars a day.

But the deeper concern in Kyiv is that as economic problems continue to gnaw at Western consumers, they will shift their governments’ focus from the war, which would tilt the situation on the battlefield in favor of the very autocrat the allies have pledged to punish.

For while Mr. Putin’s forces have already been dealt setbacks that seem likely to degrade his conventional military power for years to come, the Ukrainians have seen their towns and cities reduced to rubble and are suffering huge losses of their own. In Ukraine’s case, the casualties aren’t just uniformed soldiers. They include large numbers of civilians helping fight off the Russian invasion.

That helps explain Ukraine’s pleas for heavy weaponry and other help to inflict an early defeat on the Russians – and its concerns about European allies’ staying power.

In Washington, President Joe Biden has been cleareyed from the start about the costs involved in sanctioning Russia, and explicitly forewarned Americans of the need to bear them. But even he has had to move inflation to the top of his policy agenda, especially with the approach of midterm elections.

As for Europe, Estonia’s unerringly pro-Ukraine prime minister, Kaja Kallas, has starkly framed the challenge for the weeks ahead. Acknowledging that it was getting harder to sustain allied unity amid rising energy prices, she cited her own experience, as a teenager, of “liberation” from Soviet occupation of the Baltic States.

“Gas might be expensive,” she said, “but freedom is priceless. People living in the free world do not really understand that.”

Joe Cavaretta/South Florida Sun-Sentinel/AP

For the first time, the national average price for a gallon of regular gas exceeds $5, as seen at this Mobil station in Margate, Florida, on June 12, 2022.

Americans are watching closely: $4.48 in Georgia. $5.05 in Ohio. $6.44 in California. Week by week, the numbers at gas station pumps have been rising. 

Residents of other countries are used to higher prices, generally over $10 a gallon in Hong Kong and around $7 to $9 in most of Europe. But the United States has long counted on comparatively cheap gas to fuel a car-centric economy.

Average U.S. gas prices hit an unprecedented $5.01 on June 15, an upward trend that is contributing to a 40-year high in inflation. To slow inflationary pressure, the Federal Reserve hiked short-term interest rates by 0.75 percentage points on Wednesday in the biggest jump in 28 years. 

As anxieties mount, fingers are pointing. Turn to social media, and it seems one of two culprits is to blame for current gas prices: price-gouging corporations, or U.S. President Joe Biden. The Biden administration, meanwhile, has dubbed the situation “Putin’s price hike.” 

The real story is nuanced. For starters, this is not a purely American problem: Canada, the United Kingdom, and other countries are facing record-high prices too. Economists are quick to note that the oil market is a global one, affected by shocks to supply and demand, like the world’s emergence from the pandemic and, yes, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 

The high prices are a pressing reminder of humanity’s need to shift away from fossil fuels due to climate change. While no one is shaming consumers, both buyers and sellers are responsible for market movements – and demand for fuel has rebounded because of consumers’ choices as well as their necessities.

What has driven prices up?

As is often the case, it’s a combination of things. 

Gas prices usually follow the price of crude oil, which generally accounts for about half of the pump price but has grown to 60% in recent months. When the pandemic began, travel and industry slowed, dramatically lowering demand for crude oil. Oil companies responded by lowering production and laying off workers, in some cases shutting down refineries. As society opened up again, pent-up demand surged while global production has lagged. 

SOURCE:

U.S. Energy Information Administration

|

Karen Norris/Staff

Several factors explain the production gap. Rising input costs and supply-chain bottlenecks for equipment like casing and coiled tubing have made it difficult to increase supply quickly. Longer-term, oil and gas companies are hesitant to invest in oil infrastructure, given international ambition to phase out fossil fuels, including President Biden’s decision to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline.  

Then Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24. Prices were already rising before the invasion, but accelerated when the European Union and the U.S. moved to cut Russian oil from their energy supply. 

“Western reluctance to buy Russian oil is working,” says Chris Knittel, professor of applied economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “That means Russia is able to sell less oil [and] world prices are going to have some upward pressure.” 

In 2021, only 8% of U.S. petroleum-product imports came from Russia, but less Russian oil on the market makes crude oil more expensive for everyone. 

What’s being done?

President Biden responded to calls to increase U.S. oil supply by releasing 1 million barrels per day from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. But the move has made little impact on prices, which Dr. Knittel says isn’t surprising, given daily global consumption of around 100 million barrels. And even if Mr. Biden were to expand drilling on federal lands – a move some have called for – any resulting supplies wouldn’t show up quickly.  

On Tuesday, Mr. Biden announced that the EPA will allow the sale of a blended biofuel known as E15, long resisted by some environmental groups, over the summer for short-term relief. He is also considering negotiations with the oil-producing nations of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Venezuela to increase supply, though those effects wouldn’t be felt soon and could raise ethical concerns. 

Rick Bowmer/AP

A gasoline pump is shown on June 10, 2022, in Salt Lake City. Consumer prices surged 8.6% in May from 12 months earlier, the highest U.S. inflation rate in 40 years, the Labor Department said on June 10. The Federal Reserve moved on June 15 to raise short-term interest rates by 0.75 percentage points, in a bid to rein prices back in.

Meanwhile, a handful of states temporarily suspended gas taxes, which account for anywhere from 9% to 19% of the pump price, with more considering similar proposals. 

Addressing what some see as a greed-induced crisis on the part of oil and gas companies, which saw record-breaking profits in the first quarter of 2022, Mr. Biden sent a letter to major firms this week saying that excessive margins are “worsening that pain” for consumers. 

Already, Democratic lawmakers had pulled together a Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act. The legislation passed the House in May along partisan lines but faces a tough battle in the Senate. For opponents, high profits are a reasonable result of market forces, and do not necessarily imply price-gouging. 

What’s next?

The challenge lies in weighing both future and present needs.

“These companies are investing in a low-carbon future that in the short-term still requires the production of fossil fuels for consumers who need it today,” says Devin Gladden, AAA National’s manager for federal affairs. 

The U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts a drop in gasoline prices by 2023, but that will depend on how sanctions continue to affect Russian oil production, the amount the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries decides to produce, and to some extent the rate of drilling expansion in the U.S. 

In the meantime, Mr. Gladden says the current scenario is opening consumers’ eyes to the reality and necessity of the energy transition: “If it’s in the budget to make that switch to an electric vehicle, they’ll do it.” 

Those who can’t afford a higher-efficiency car, or can’t buy an electric vehicle due to supply-chain hiccups, are more likely to bike, carpool, combine or reduce trips, and use public transportation where available.  

For Dr. Knittel, now is a chance to reassess our collective dependency on oil. To phase out fossil fuels without hurting consumers, demand will need to fall in tune with decreased production. 

“We can’t affect the price, but we could affect how much we need to buy, and that’s what I hope policymakers are focusing on these days.”

Nearly every morning when Yuli opens the front door of her apartment in central Havana, someone is already waiting outside. Older people and the occasional teenager or young parent from the neighborhood knock on the door and loiter out front, peering through her window to try to catch a glimpse of what’s inside.

They’re looking for food.

Cuba is grappling with its worst food shortages in more than two decades, and a tanking, inefficient economy means many people are struggling to find the bare necessities. Yuli is part of one of several grassroots efforts to patch the holes left by the shortages.

She can do that because she is privileged. Relatives in the United States send her cash, which allows her to enter exclusive, hard-currency-only grocery stores. She uses her remittances to buy chicken, milk, hot dogs, and even shampoo, and then resells those goods out of her home to some of her most vulnerable neighbors.

Taking somewhat of a modern-day Robin Hood approach, she offers resale prices that are two to three times lower than the going rate on the more traditional black market. That’s where most citizens are forced to turn if they need something specific or can’t afford to wait in hourslong lines at government stores or bare markets that accept Cuban pesos.

“I always post online when I have something for sale, but people come even when I don’t post, and I have to turn them away,” says Yuli, a biologist who asked to use only her first name because reselling – whether or not for profit ­– is against the law in Cuba. “It’s hard because these are people who don’t have much, and they probably can’t afford to buy from anyone else.”

Over the past two years, the Cuban economy has suffered repeated blows. Tourism, its most important source of foreign exchange, dwindled during the pandemic, inflation hit 70% last year, local food production is falling, and more recently Russia’s attack on Ukraine has upped oil prices and threatened greater shortages.

Today’s inflation woes “have an impact above all on food,” says Pavel Vidal, a Cuban economist who teaches at Universidad Javeriana in Colombia.

Amanda Perobelli/Reuters

People line up to buy food in downtown Havana on March 1, 2022. Cuba is grappling with its worst food shortages in more than two decades, with many comparing the situation to the "special period" after the fall of the Soviet Union.

The black market, illegal but by no means clandestine, is the only place to find many essentials. Business is dominated by resellers, known as revendedores, who have the dollars or euros needed to shop in the special stores, and contacts who alert them when a shop has been restocked. They often clear the shelves of a particular product and sell it at up to seven times the original price.

But not everyone is looking to use their advantages to turn a profit. As hunger and desperation grow, more and more resellers, like Yuli, are focused primarily on feeding their neighbors. WhatsApp groups advertising what people have to offer, or what they are on the hunt for, have proliferated. Daily stoop sales, where neighbors can barter children’s clothes for soap, or a rice cooker for a fan, are increasingly common.

It is at once a reflection both of this moment in Cuba, when shortages are acute, and of an enduring characteristic of Cuban society. Creative solidarity, needed to bridge the gaps left by the island’s political and economic realities, is a virtue that has been passed down from generation to generation.

“There’s a reactivation of social networks,” says Osnaide Izquierdo Quintana, a professor of economic sociology at the University of Havana, who studies informal markets. “This process is creating a strong culture of solidarity and shifting people’s attitudes toward everyone around them.”

“The only way to find anything”

For the past two years the pandemic has reduced trade and tourism, accentuating the impact of the U.S. embargo, and the Cuban government is low on dollars and other hard currencies. To shore up its foreign reserves, the government began selling some products in special stores, exclusively in currencies like dollars or euros.

Only those receiving remittances from abroad or earning foreign currency may enter these types of grocery stores. Since it is illegal to trade pesos for dollars on the island, and the government doesn’t sell dollars at banks, access to such stores is a valuable privilege.

Every Cuban citizen receives a certain amount of rice, bread, and soap from the government, but these provisions are insufficient.

It can take all day for Cubans to collect the items necessary for dinner: a few hours waiting in line to get into a store to buy powdered milk, another hour in another line for bread, and possibly two hours more waiting for chicken somewhere else. The lengthy waits often take place under the pounding sun, in 90 degree heat.

“No one goes to work anymore because you just wait in line near your office; then you wait in line near your home. Then you still might not be able to get what you need,” says Luis Miguel, who trained as a teacher but works as a janitor and dockworker to pay his rent and afford food. “Buy-and-sell groups are the only way to find anything. Without them, what are you going to eat?” he asks, abandoning the line at a bakery. It’s almost closing time, and clear that those still waiting won’t get any bread today.

Standing over a steaming pot of brothy drumsticks in her kitchen on a recent evening, Yuli says any profit she might make selling items goes toward buying more. She is known for her low-priced chicken and sausages, two items in high demand. Yuli knows she’s privileged to have family sending U.S. dollars – and a contact who can tip her off when a shop is going to be stocked – so she typically sells her products at the store’s ticket price, except for the rare occasions when she’s short on rent.

“I don’t like to charge too much. It doesn’t feel right,” she says. “There isn’t anyone who isn’t poor.”

That attitude exemplifies a particularly Cuban manner of facing difficulties, says Elena Gentili, Oxfam International’s country director here. The island’s history of recurring hard times has given rise to learned strategies that show how “important the value of solidarity is, and how resilient the Cuban people are,” says Ms. Gentili. “Community networks, which now include WhatsApp and other social media, are key to overcoming shortages.”

Yeni, a university student in Havana, is the administrator of several large buy-and-sell groups on WhatsApp. Together, they have thousands of members who post daily, advertising tubes of deodorant or asking who has seen pork for sale nearby.

“Everyone in Cuba was already ... selling a little bit of everything, because of the shortages,” she says. She considers her work – tracking down difficult-to-locate products and making sure members are civil in their online interactions – a public service, even if it, too, is illegal.

“The community market has become fundamental,” says Dr. Izquierdo Quintana.

Kate Bush is accustomed to strange things. After all, she once wrote a heart-melting song about a love affair between a woman and a snowman. But last week the songwriter unexpectedly topped Spotify’s charts. Her song “Running Up That Hill (A Deal With God),” first released in 1985, is topping charts worldwide, and in the U.S. has also broken into the top 10 on Billboard. The reason? It’s featured in the latest season of “Stranger Things’’ on Netflix.

The mysterious musician, whose last public appearance was in 2014, has issued rare statements in response. She’s excited that the song is “being given a whole new lease of life by the young fans who love the show.” 

In her native U.K., Ms. Bush is an icon. In 2013, the Queen honored her for services to music. The creative pioneer – cited as an influence by subsequent generations of notable musicians – is widely regarded as occupying the same pantheon as Prince, David Bowie, and Joni Mitchell. Yet, prior to now, Ms. Bush had never had a U.S. Top 10 single. Fans and critics say that it’s a long overdue correction to her low profile in North America. One of music’s most unique innovators is finally getting her due thanks to the TikTok generation. 

“In the 21st century, creators often talk about world-building. And Kate Bush is a world builder,” says Ann Powers, NPR Music’s critic and author of the 2020 book, “Kate Bush’s The Dreaming.” “When you discover, through that artist, whole scenes and visions and maps and all-encompassing narratives, well, then that’s going to hook you in. We’re talking about new fans who are raised on things like Harry Potter and Percy Jackson. So Kate is the perfect project artist for those generations.”

Ms. Bush’s songs – and indelible music videos – often play like fantastical movies. “Cloudbusting” tells the story of a man arrested by the government for inventing a machine that can produce rain. “Snowed In At Wheeler Street,” a duet with Elton John, imagines two time-traveling lovers meeting at different points in history. Side B of “Hounds of Love” is a conceptual suite about the thoughts of a woman adrift in the ocean after her boat sinks. (Spoiler: She gets rescued.)

Stephen Humpries/The Christian Science Monitor

Kate Bush has released 10 studio albums during her career. Her fifth album, "Hounds of Love," spawned the hit "Running Up That Hill (A Deal With God)," which features prominently in the latest season of the Netflix show "Stranger Things."

Ms. Bush’s prodigious imagination blossomed during childhood. Her Bohemian family lived in a farmhouse, where dense trees secluded their Shangri-La from the busy streets of South East London. Ms. Bush and her two older brothers were enthralled by poetry, mythology, TV and film, and their mother’s beloved Irish folk music. By 13, the self-taught pianist had composed a future hit song, “The Man With the Child in His Eyes.” 

“She was encouraged to write, encouraged to perform, encouraged to listen to things,” says Graeme Thomson, author of “Under the Ivy: The Life and Music of Kate Bush.” “There was no sarcasm in her house. People were never belittling or demeaning. It was a very positive place.”

EMI records was skeptical about Ms. Bush’s insistence on releasing an Emily Brontë-inspired composition as her debut single. “Wuthering Heights,” released in 1978, showcases the teenage soprano’s early vocal style. Her theatrical wail cut through the static on radios across Britain. She became the first female artist to have a self-written song top the British charts.

To her record company’s chagrin, their budding star rejected an offer to tour with Fleetwood Mac that would have raised her visibility in the United States. She had no interest in playing a straight-up rock concert. Instead, Ms. Bush mounted her own Tour of Life in the U.K. These days it’s de rigueur for pop stars to build live shows around dance routines. In 1979, Ms. Bush’s ballet choreography was revolutionary. The singer, along with her production team, invented the first wireless headset microphone – fashioned out of coat-hanger wire – so that she wasn’t tethered to a microphone stand. During her 17 costume changes, the audience was entertained by poetry readings and mime performances.

imago/Future Image/Reuters/File

Kate Bush during a photo call in the London Planetarium in 1985.

Those were Ms. Bush’s last shows until 2014 when she mounted an even more ambitious 22-show multimedia extravaganza in a London theater. She focused, instead, on producing her own albums, embracing the Fairlight – a synthesizer that could play samples of recorded sounds – before it became ubiquitous in ’80s music. 

“You paint in sounds,” explains Mr. Thomson. “You can write without having to conventionally knock out the chords. And you hear that particularly on ‘The Dreaming’ and ‘Hounds of Love.’ Those records are very, very forward-facing. That’s about using technology. … I’m not sure she gets enough credit for that.”

Those influential albums caught the ear of fast-rising young millennial songwriter and producer Anna Schwab, who goes by the moniker Sadie.

“I am inspired by her production,” says Sadie, whose June 21 release, “Nowhere,” has been playlisted by Sirius XM and lauded by music critics at Fader and Stereogum. “One of my favorite songs on ‘Hounds of Love’ Is ‘Watching You Without Me.’ … I think she uses the same patch on her sampler, her synth in ‘Running Up That Hill,’ but they’re very bouncy, like round, fluffy sounds. … I try to recreate it all the time.”

Ms. Powers, from NPR, encourages new listeners to seek out Ms. Bush’s later works such as “50 Words for Snow,” “Aerial,” and “The Red Shoes.” (Fun fact: Prince guests on the latter album.) Those records showcase her more mature, maternal voice and a startling emotional directness – on full display in “Running Up That Hill,” the song that the creative duo known as the Duffer Brothers sought out for their 1980s-set teen horror show, “Stranger Things.” 

“She was only interested in [“Stranger Things”] if her music was being used in a creative and interesting way,” says Seán Twomey, host of the “Kate Bush Fan Podcast” and founder of the fan site Kate Bush News.

Ms. Bush’s newfound popularity is ironic, he says, because she has always consciously avoided musical trends.

“She just follows her own artistic muse,” says Mr. Twomey. “That’s why her music just does have this kind of timeless quality.” 

Reuters

Parish priest Andriy Klyushev talks about damage to his church in Irpin, Ukraine. The church split from the Russian Orthodox Church in May and was attacked by Russian forces.

One running tally in the Ukraine war is the number of churches damaged or destroyed by the Russian military. During a TV address in early June, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced that 113 churches had been attacked since the Feb. 24 invasion. His larger point to the Ukrainian people? The struggle to save Ukraine is also a defense of religious liberty.

Protecting that freedom – among others – may indeed be a big motivator for Ukrainian fighters. After all, the largely Christian nation elected a Jew as president – Mr. Zelenskyy – by a landslide in 2019. Ukraine’s religious leaders often speak of freedom of conscience in choosing and practicing a faith. Its main faiths – Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant – cooperate on issues, not merely coexist. During the 2013-14 Maidan revolution, clergy offered prayers, comfort, and serenity to pro-democracy protesters in the capital, Kyiv.

One reason given for the war is a fear by President Vladimir Putin that Ukraine’s various Orthodox churches have broken or are breaking away from the authority of the Russian Orthodox Church, which aligns itself with the Kremlin’s autocracy. That drift undercuts a belief in Russia that it is the center of the Orthodox world.

The attacks on Ukrainian churches may be aimed at sending a message against religious freedom. But they serve another purpose. “Given that the church as an institution of society enjoys the greatest level of trust of the citizens of Ukraine, religious figures are one of the biggest obstacles for the Russian invaders,” Maksym Vasin, executive director of the Institute for Religious Freedom, told Devex, a news site on global development.

Such attacks are not a surprise to Ukrainians. After Russia took Crimea by force in 2014 – a response to the success of the Maidan revolution – it suppressed all faiths in the peninsula other than the Russian Orthodox Church. Now the war in 2022 is again reinforcing Ukraine’s national narrative that it is a country that honors individual rights, especially religious liberty.

Freedom, however, is only a means to an end. “I have to be free in order to love,” says the Right Rev. Dr. Andriy Chirovsky at Toronto’s St. Michael’s College and an expert on Eastern Christianity. Being able to love is what it means to be created in the image and likeness of God, he told The Catholic Register while speaking about the Ukraine war.

During his TV address on June 4, the Ukrainian president pleaded with Russian troops to stop attacking churches. He was appealing to their conscience, perhaps out of a deep love. That is what religions do. They appeal to people to think from higher principles. As Ukrainians defend their own religious liberty, they are doing so for everyone.