I'm reading a book about Jane Austen at the moment and was trying to visualise the sort of dress that Elizabeth Bennett is wearing when she has mud on her dress and is mocked by the Bingley sisters. Part of the mockery is due to the fact that her dress is not a la mode. It's so great that you made it clear that not everyone was wearing the up to the minute fashion for any number of reasons. Your image of the mother and her two daughters was perfect for my visualisation!
Your blog is great and I'm really happy to have found it!
Thursday, June 07, 2018
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Mad Men. Season Two - Episode One. “For Those Who Think Young”
Season two opens with the three major female characters. First Joan and Peggy getting ready for work and then Betty horse-riding. In each of these we see something about surface control exhibited in different ways. Joan is all woman, curves and sex appeal, squeezed into a figure hugging dress, rearranging her breasts in what one surmises is a pretty powerful and probably uncomfortable foundation garment. Peggy looks like she's a teenager who hasn't quite made the transition from the 1950s, watching her put on her perfume is like watching a young girl playing with her mother's cosmetics, but like Joan she is arranging the surface in an attempt to exude control. And then there is Betty. Joan and Peggy's attempts both look amateurish next to hers. Joan is a Titian Monroe, too sexy to be entirely professional, Peggy is Sandra Dee turned prefect, too teenage prim to be seen as the professional copywriter she wants to be, but Betty is Grace Kelly perfect on her horse. Not a hair out of place, no dirt on her perfect jodhpurs, her hacking jacket fit for purpose but looking like it might have just stepped off the runway. Betty is complete control which she demonstrates when she takes her horse over a jump, and completely glacial which she shows in the conversation on the way to her car. We are left wondering if there are any true human emotions going on under that perfect exterior. Betty the creative executive's wife is all style over substance.
The female struggle for surface control was a theme throughout the episode. Joan deliberating about the location of the photocopier – and where did it eventually end up? In Peggy's office. One remaining way for Joan to keep Peggy in her place, whatever her earlier remonstrances with Don's secretary where she told her she must have respect for “Miss Olsen”. Peggy taking out her frustrations on Lois, Don's secretary, while in the conference room it's made clear that to the boys she's still just one of the secretaries, whatever her new position. Later in Pete Campbell's office their attitude is summed up when in a conversation about the new young blood being interviewed for the agency, Peggy points out that she is only twenty-two. “You don't count” and she doesn't. Not yet. And Betty? Style over substance outs again when chatting with a Francine Hanson she pretends to have missed Jackie Kennedy's televisual tour of the White House because she was too busy. The implication being that she and Don were having sex, the reality being that he couldn't get it up. She also pretends a worldliness that she doesn't have, in telling the meeting with a former room-mate, Juanita Carson, she says that Don had agreed with her that Juanita was a call-girl. Betty had not realised this rather obvious fact until Don had pointed it out to her. And there is another important aspect of the night that Betty is misrepresenting: she dressed sexily for Don, but when he failed to perform she said “I wish you would just tell me what to do.” And we understand, again, that Betty can look the part, but she doesn't know how to act it.
And what of the other characters? Roger Sterling's brief appearance brings no new insight, he is still the same man, manipulating, wheeling and dealing, and lusting after Joan's voluptuous charms. Peter Campbell, no longer freshly married, is now playing the role of slightly put upon husband having tired of the role of enchanted newly-wed. Salvatore Romano is even deeper in his closet as we catch sight of him on the couch with his wife. And then there is Don. His visit to the doctor to have a medical for insurance purposes informs both him and us that his lifestyle is having an impact on his health. In typical Draper style he seems to do nothing to curtail his excesses. Indeed toward the end of the episode we see him pouring a large glass of bourbon before offering Carla, his and Betty's maid, a lift home. Prior to that it's business as usual in the office. Interviewing Smitty and Kurt the two new young guns giving the “old guard” cause for concern, trying to steer the Mohawk Airlines account in a direction that has feeling, and sparring with Duck Phillips. But beneath the apparently unchanged surface there are indications that Don has not taken his doctor's warning as lightly as all that. There are hints of this throughout the episode, his inability to perform sexually, his focus on the drawing of the little girl in the Mohawk picture board, his interaction with his children. But the biggest clue of all is at the end of the episode. Don is in his study reading Meditations in an Emergency, a collection of poetry by Frank O'Hara. In voice-over we hear him reciting the lines:
“The country is gray and brown and white and trees. Snows and skies of laughter always diminishing.
Less funny, not just darker, not just gray.
It may be the coldest day of the year. What does he think of that ... I mean, what do I?
And if I do...perhaps I am myself again.”
Could the creative executive be a man of substance over style?
He then takes the book, writes on it: ““Made me think of you – D”, puts it in an envelope and walks to the mailbox to post it. Who is Don sending it to? Why is his reading a private matter? Who is privy to the substance of Don Draper? We know we will find out, we just don't know when, and that is part of the captivating charm of this wonderful series. Nothing is rushed, it's all about delayed gratification and the pleasure is all the sweeter because of it.
The female struggle for surface control was a theme throughout the episode. Joan deliberating about the location of the photocopier – and where did it eventually end up? In Peggy's office. One remaining way for Joan to keep Peggy in her place, whatever her earlier remonstrances with Don's secretary where she told her she must have respect for “Miss Olsen”. Peggy taking out her frustrations on Lois, Don's secretary, while in the conference room it's made clear that to the boys she's still just one of the secretaries, whatever her new position. Later in Pete Campbell's office their attitude is summed up when in a conversation about the new young blood being interviewed for the agency, Peggy points out that she is only twenty-two. “You don't count” and she doesn't. Not yet. And Betty? Style over substance outs again when chatting with a Francine Hanson she pretends to have missed Jackie Kennedy's televisual tour of the White House because she was too busy. The implication being that she and Don were having sex, the reality being that he couldn't get it up. She also pretends a worldliness that she doesn't have, in telling the meeting with a former room-mate, Juanita Carson, she says that Don had agreed with her that Juanita was a call-girl. Betty had not realised this rather obvious fact until Don had pointed it out to her. And there is another important aspect of the night that Betty is misrepresenting: she dressed sexily for Don, but when he failed to perform she said “I wish you would just tell me what to do.” And we understand, again, that Betty can look the part, but she doesn't know how to act it.
And what of the other characters? Roger Sterling's brief appearance brings no new insight, he is still the same man, manipulating, wheeling and dealing, and lusting after Joan's voluptuous charms. Peter Campbell, no longer freshly married, is now playing the role of slightly put upon husband having tired of the role of enchanted newly-wed. Salvatore Romano is even deeper in his closet as we catch sight of him on the couch with his wife. And then there is Don. His visit to the doctor to have a medical for insurance purposes informs both him and us that his lifestyle is having an impact on his health. In typical Draper style he seems to do nothing to curtail his excesses. Indeed toward the end of the episode we see him pouring a large glass of bourbon before offering Carla, his and Betty's maid, a lift home. Prior to that it's business as usual in the office. Interviewing Smitty and Kurt the two new young guns giving the “old guard” cause for concern, trying to steer the Mohawk Airlines account in a direction that has feeling, and sparring with Duck Phillips. But beneath the apparently unchanged surface there are indications that Don has not taken his doctor's warning as lightly as all that. There are hints of this throughout the episode, his inability to perform sexually, his focus on the drawing of the little girl in the Mohawk picture board, his interaction with his children. But the biggest clue of all is at the end of the episode. Don is in his study reading Meditations in an Emergency, a collection of poetry by Frank O'Hara. In voice-over we hear him reciting the lines:
“The country is gray and brown and white and trees. Snows and skies of laughter always diminishing.
Less funny, not just darker, not just gray.
It may be the coldest day of the year. What does he think of that ... I mean, what do I?
And if I do...perhaps I am myself again.”
Could the creative executive be a man of substance over style?
He then takes the book, writes on it: ““Made me think of you – D”, puts it in an envelope and walks to the mailbox to post it. Who is Don sending it to? Why is his reading a private matter? Who is privy to the substance of Don Draper? We know we will find out, we just don't know when, and that is part of the captivating charm of this wonderful series. Nothing is rushed, it's all about delayed gratification and the pleasure is all the sweeter because of it.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Gissa Job
This week, after many months of being unhappy at work, I handed in my notice. To badly paraphrase Charles Dickens, it was the right thing to do, it was the wrong thing to do. Right because I could feel myself sinking into depression, it was making me ill, I couldn't do right for doing wrong in the eyes of my manager and it was starting to erode away my confidence and self-esteem. It was wrong because I don't have a job to go to, I only have a week's notice to work and ... well now I'm scrabbling around looking for a job!
But here's the thing: I'm not scared. I feel invigorated. I feel that anything is possible. The more banal truth is that I will probably temp for a while before opting to take another job that doesn't stretch my creative abilities and that I like well enough but doesn't inspire me. Why should I be any different to the vast majority of the drones? But unless and until that happens, I am determined to see the world as mine, just waiting to be claimed. I am determined to fly by the seat of my pants and believe that because I am prepared to take a chance, life might just take a chance on me.
I'm happy! I feel like a child wriggling her toes in the hot sand of the sort of beach that doesn't really exist in Britain outside of our imaginations. I know I am alive and that somehow things are going to be more than okay.
But here's the thing: I'm not scared. I feel invigorated. I feel that anything is possible. The more banal truth is that I will probably temp for a while before opting to take another job that doesn't stretch my creative abilities and that I like well enough but doesn't inspire me. Why should I be any different to the vast majority of the drones? But unless and until that happens, I am determined to see the world as mine, just waiting to be claimed. I am determined to fly by the seat of my pants and believe that because I am prepared to take a chance, life might just take a chance on me.
I'm happy! I feel like a child wriggling her toes in the hot sand of the sort of beach that doesn't really exist in Britain outside of our imaginations. I know I am alive and that somehow things are going to be more than okay.
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
More on 'Sink Estates'
The below was also posted earlier as a response to the suggestion that we should condemn everything that is creating "this situation", and that having done that we should have the balls to do something about it, rather than brush it under the carpet.
Right. But who here is brushing it under the carpet, and what exactly are we supposed to do as individuals. Condemenation on a talkboard is just so much hot air.
I have lots of ideas that I think might be workable and might make a difference, having seen some of them work in other situations. As a child I realised that if you put all the 'bad people' in one place it was a recipe for disaster and that you would create estates that no one wanted to live on, in order to keep the 'bad people' away from everyone else. I knew that if you wanted to make society work, you had to stop creating ghettos, you had to try and make sure that 'good' and 'bad' lived cheek by jowl, because it was far more likely that 'bad' people living in a 'good' environment would see the benefits and feel the motivation to emulate the good rather than the bad.
It's not so easy these days. Social housing is totally fucked, thanks to decades of appalling policy decisions, so estates generally become holding areas for those in need, and some of those in need are less 'socially acceptable' than others.
Things that have worked.
A 'sink estate' in the North-East was so bad that everyone who could move out did. As fewer people were left, the local authority moved them out, completely did the estate up and then offered housing to people from outside the area who didn't know of its reputation and saw it for what it could be - a decent environment in which to live and make a go of it. Pretty drastic, but it shows that an improved environment and a different perspective can work.
Education - giving people the tools and the motivation to make the most of themselves, understanding that this should not all be measured 'academically' and therefore looking to fund apprenticeships again, giving everyone the chance to learn a trade if they want to and are able to. Education is investment in the future, spend more on that than fucked up conflicts overseas.
Investment - get estate dwellers involved in doing up their estates, get them involved in setting up tenants associations that are involved in the running of the estate and have a vested interest in making the place the best it possibly can be.
Policing - invest in community policing if needs be, but make their presence felt so that everyone feels safe.
Adult education and literacy - channel this. TV adverts are all very well and good, but bring it to the places where it is most needed.
Investment in social housing and a change in the law regarding private tenants - Tenants are treated like scum by the law. Constantly having to sign tenancy agreements, never knowing when they will have to move to the next flat with all the expense that involves. Social housing was not just a net to catch those in need, but ensured that just about everyone could look forward to decent housing unless and until they decided to buy for themselves. We'll never get back to that but there needs to be a greater understanding that we need more of it.
And finally an understanding that this will all take time, that there is no quick fix and that there will always be a minority of people who don't give a fuck. For a change focus on the people who do and stop pretending that everyone is - as I said before - the lowest common denominator by virtue of their address.
As a postscript, the fact that this debate is taking place in a thread about Shannon Matthews is ... interesting isn't really the word, but it will have to do. Just as everyone who lives on a 'sink estate' isn't the scum of the earth, so most mothers with an abundance of children, possibly (shock horror) by different fathers, would not dream of behaving in the way that Ms Matthews allegedly did. Her geographical location does not make her a representative of a type of mother in any way, shape or form.
Right. But who here is brushing it under the carpet, and what exactly are we supposed to do as individuals. Condemenation on a talkboard is just so much hot air.
I have lots of ideas that I think might be workable and might make a difference, having seen some of them work in other situations. As a child I realised that if you put all the 'bad people' in one place it was a recipe for disaster and that you would create estates that no one wanted to live on, in order to keep the 'bad people' away from everyone else. I knew that if you wanted to make society work, you had to stop creating ghettos, you had to try and make sure that 'good' and 'bad' lived cheek by jowl, because it was far more likely that 'bad' people living in a 'good' environment would see the benefits and feel the motivation to emulate the good rather than the bad.
It's not so easy these days. Social housing is totally fucked, thanks to decades of appalling policy decisions, so estates generally become holding areas for those in need, and some of those in need are less 'socially acceptable' than others.
Things that have worked.
A 'sink estate' in the North-East was so bad that everyone who could move out did. As fewer people were left, the local authority moved them out, completely did the estate up and then offered housing to people from outside the area who didn't know of its reputation and saw it for what it could be - a decent environment in which to live and make a go of it. Pretty drastic, but it shows that an improved environment and a different perspective can work.
Education - giving people the tools and the motivation to make the most of themselves, understanding that this should not all be measured 'academically' and therefore looking to fund apprenticeships again, giving everyone the chance to learn a trade if they want to and are able to. Education is investment in the future, spend more on that than fucked up conflicts overseas.
Investment - get estate dwellers involved in doing up their estates, get them involved in setting up tenants associations that are involved in the running of the estate and have a vested interest in making the place the best it possibly can be.
Policing - invest in community policing if needs be, but make their presence felt so that everyone feels safe.
Adult education and literacy - channel this. TV adverts are all very well and good, but bring it to the places where it is most needed.
Investment in social housing and a change in the law regarding private tenants - Tenants are treated like scum by the law. Constantly having to sign tenancy agreements, never knowing when they will have to move to the next flat with all the expense that involves. Social housing was not just a net to catch those in need, but ensured that just about everyone could look forward to decent housing unless and until they decided to buy for themselves. We'll never get back to that but there needs to be a greater understanding that we need more of it.
And finally an understanding that this will all take time, that there is no quick fix and that there will always be a minority of people who don't give a fuck. For a change focus on the people who do and stop pretending that everyone is - as I said before - the lowest common denominator by virtue of their address.
As a postscript, the fact that this debate is taking place in a thread about Shannon Matthews is ... interesting isn't really the word, but it will have to do. Just as everyone who lives on a 'sink estate' isn't the scum of the earth, so most mothers with an abundance of children, possibly (shock horror) by different fathers, would not dream of behaving in the way that Ms Matthews allegedly did. Her geographical location does not make her a representative of a type of mother in any way, shape or form.
Karen Matthews, yet another excuse to rail at 'sink estates'
Karen Matthews has been remanded in custody, charged with child neglect and attempting to pervert the course of justice. From what we can ascertain, it would appear that her daughter, Shannon, was never kidnapped, although this is supposition, based on the fact that she has been remanded on charges - yet to be proved - that suggest this was the case. So, what we can say is that it was allegedly, a ruse, if so, it was most probably a money-making ruse and, again if these allegations are true, one in which the welfare of Shannon was an afterthought if that. There seems to be plenty to condemn Karen Matthews for.
However, in the wake of this shocking case, what we get is not just condemnation of Karen Matthews for her alleged offences, but an attempt to treat her as a typical resident of a 'sink estate'. Whatever else she is, she is far from a typical anything. The fact of having a number of children by different fathers does not turn a woman into a Karen Matthews. Ones geographical location does not make one think that the faux kidnapping of ones own daughter is a good way of making a quick buck. But that hasn't stopped the stereotyping, the call for sterilisation of young uneducated women, the cries that they should be denied benefits because that will stop them. And underlying all of this is the notion that the inhabitants of 'sink estates' are all the same. The below was posted on a talkboard earlier today:
What we are left with on these "sink estates" are those that decades of economic growth and unprecedented education have left behind. Other measures are called for - accepting there is always a small chance there is something left in the genepool there worth lavishing a uni education on.
And this was my response, this is in part what I think of the current desire to characterise all residents of these estates as potential Karen Matthews, as people who are beyond 'redemption':
No we're not. Or we're not necessarily only looking at that. Sink estates are not some homogeneous mass. All sorts of people live on them, some having a better time of it than others, many wanting to make their environment better but not having the first clue, or maybe the motivation, to do it, and some who don't give a fuck and by and large offer nothing of much or any good to society at large.
For many a sink estate is just their address and they do what they can to make the most of it. If you need housing and you get moved to a 'sink estate' you're not going to refuse it, even if that is not where you want to live. If you live on one you do not necessarily fit the stereotype that everyone conjures up when they hear the words 'sink estate'.
I was brought up on what had once been a decent estate but had become a 'sink estate' by the time we moved there. We lived there for 5 years and then moved to a better place, mostly because being transferred was easier in those days and my dad had died so we went to the top of the list on compassionate grounds. Of course it wasn't called a 'sink estate' in those days, it was more likely referred to as a shithole, but while we were there I managed to get into a grammar school and while I was well aware of everything that went on around us, the drugs, the alcohol, the muggings, burglaries and general squalor, it wasn't who my family or I were. It wasn't our next door neighbours either. It wasn't every resident on the estate then and I know it's not every resident on every 'sink estate' now.
Defining 'sink estates' by their lowest common denominator is part of the problem.
However, in the wake of this shocking case, what we get is not just condemnation of Karen Matthews for her alleged offences, but an attempt to treat her as a typical resident of a 'sink estate'. Whatever else she is, she is far from a typical anything. The fact of having a number of children by different fathers does not turn a woman into a Karen Matthews. Ones geographical location does not make one think that the faux kidnapping of ones own daughter is a good way of making a quick buck. But that hasn't stopped the stereotyping, the call for sterilisation of young uneducated women, the cries that they should be denied benefits because that will stop them. And underlying all of this is the notion that the inhabitants of 'sink estates' are all the same. The below was posted on a talkboard earlier today:
What we are left with on these "sink estates" are those that decades of economic growth and unprecedented education have left behind. Other measures are called for - accepting there is always a small chance there is something left in the genepool there worth lavishing a uni education on.
And this was my response, this is in part what I think of the current desire to characterise all residents of these estates as potential Karen Matthews, as people who are beyond 'redemption':
No we're not. Or we're not necessarily only looking at that. Sink estates are not some homogeneous mass. All sorts of people live on them, some having a better time of it than others, many wanting to make their environment better but not having the first clue, or maybe the motivation, to do it, and some who don't give a fuck and by and large offer nothing of much or any good to society at large.
For many a sink estate is just their address and they do what they can to make the most of it. If you need housing and you get moved to a 'sink estate' you're not going to refuse it, even if that is not where you want to live. If you live on one you do not necessarily fit the stereotype that everyone conjures up when they hear the words 'sink estate'.
I was brought up on what had once been a decent estate but had become a 'sink estate' by the time we moved there. We lived there for 5 years and then moved to a better place, mostly because being transferred was easier in those days and my dad had died so we went to the top of the list on compassionate grounds. Of course it wasn't called a 'sink estate' in those days, it was more likely referred to as a shithole, but while we were there I managed to get into a grammar school and while I was well aware of everything that went on around us, the drugs, the alcohol, the muggings, burglaries and general squalor, it wasn't who my family or I were. It wasn't our next door neighbours either. It wasn't every resident on the estate then and I know it's not every resident on every 'sink estate' now.
Defining 'sink estates' by their lowest common denominator is part of the problem.
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Big Brother Celebrity Hijack - 3rd January Launch Show
An excellent name for the show. Maybe they'll stay with the terrorism theme and the summer version will be called Big Brother Suicide Bomber, with all the carnage that implies.
Still, if tonight's opening is anything to go by, they won't need any extra carnage. Poor old Dermott O'Leary telling us its "Genius!" and "Brilliant!" every time the camera cuts to him, when all we can really see going on is the baiting of a fat ginger Scot who is being remotely controlled by Matt Lucas and made to act like a socially retarded hunchback. Oh I'm sorry, have I forgotten to describe the concept! Pay attention now, this is the er, science bit. Where science = a bunch of gakked up twats trying to come up with a format after they discover that there isn't a celebrity in the world who's prepared to risk their career on the show anymore. So. We have a house full of allegedly talented plebs who are - and here's the hilarious bit - being controlled by celebs! Brilliant! Genius! The celebs have hijacked Big Brother! Oh, there go my sides.
The first celebrity to do this is Matt Lucas, a noted comedy Genius, a Brilliant raconteur and bald twat. He decided that the aforementioned fat ginger Scot should go into the house first because he was the one most likely to pass Matt's fiendish task. That task, is to be told to do stupid things by Matt via the medium of an earpiece and a stupid hat. Have you lost the will to live yet? I think the fat ginger Scot has. His name is John and he is a junior politician. Other talents in the house include, a racing driver, a boxer, a fashion designer, an entreprenueur with a bad weave, circus freaks and someone who wears a bikini for a living and is good at quizzes set by nazis. Apparently she can't spell Canada, but she can tell you which triangle looks like another triangle, whether Florence is older than Mary or younger than John or both, and the name of Hitler's favourite dog.
In short, this is utter shite, which is probably why its inglorious run will be occur in the relative privacy of E4. The producers don't have the brains to realise that their target audience don't want to see young people with 'talent', however dubious, they want to see desperate wannabes. Losers who are only one tit-flash away from obscurity, ranting racist bullies who they can hate while failing to see themselves in the fatally flawed freak performing for their delectation. They'll hate this bunch for having aspirations beyond sucking off a footballer and/or falling out of nightclubs covered in sick and fingering a page three reject. They'll probably laugh a little at the peurile antics of fat embryo stunt double, Lucas, they might even raise a snigger or two a the ubiquitous comedy vacuum, Jimmy Wan-Carr, but what will they make of Jake and Dinos Chapman? Brian Sewell? Joan Rivers?
It's a slo-mo car crash with a only handful of rubberneckers to watch its grim passage. But in case you think this is just an exercise in negativity, I would like to reassure you that there is one brilliantly shining silver lining to this dim and dreary cloud. It is so bad, so irredeemably fucking awful, that I am finally free from the addiction that started back in the year 2000. Thank you Endemol! Thank you, you shite-shovelling shitstains! Free at last, Free at last thank Bazelgette almighty, I'm free at last!
Still, if tonight's opening is anything to go by, they won't need any extra carnage. Poor old Dermott O'Leary telling us its "Genius!" and "Brilliant!" every time the camera cuts to him, when all we can really see going on is the baiting of a fat ginger Scot who is being remotely controlled by Matt Lucas and made to act like a socially retarded hunchback. Oh I'm sorry, have I forgotten to describe the concept! Pay attention now, this is the er, science bit. Where science = a bunch of gakked up twats trying to come up with a format after they discover that there isn't a celebrity in the world who's prepared to risk their career on the show anymore. So. We have a house full of allegedly talented plebs who are - and here's the hilarious bit - being controlled by celebs! Brilliant! Genius! The celebs have hijacked Big Brother! Oh, there go my sides.
The first celebrity to do this is Matt Lucas, a noted comedy Genius, a Brilliant raconteur and bald twat. He decided that the aforementioned fat ginger Scot should go into the house first because he was the one most likely to pass Matt's fiendish task. That task, is to be told to do stupid things by Matt via the medium of an earpiece and a stupid hat. Have you lost the will to live yet? I think the fat ginger Scot has. His name is John and he is a junior politician. Other talents in the house include, a racing driver, a boxer, a fashion designer, an entreprenueur with a bad weave, circus freaks and someone who wears a bikini for a living and is good at quizzes set by nazis. Apparently she can't spell Canada, but she can tell you which triangle looks like another triangle, whether Florence is older than Mary or younger than John or both, and the name of Hitler's favourite dog.
In short, this is utter shite, which is probably why its inglorious run will be occur in the relative privacy of E4. The producers don't have the brains to realise that their target audience don't want to see young people with 'talent', however dubious, they want to see desperate wannabes. Losers who are only one tit-flash away from obscurity, ranting racist bullies who they can hate while failing to see themselves in the fatally flawed freak performing for their delectation. They'll hate this bunch for having aspirations beyond sucking off a footballer and/or falling out of nightclubs covered in sick and fingering a page three reject. They'll probably laugh a little at the peurile antics of fat embryo stunt double, Lucas, they might even raise a snigger or two a the ubiquitous comedy vacuum, Jimmy Wan-Carr, but what will they make of Jake and Dinos Chapman? Brian Sewell? Joan Rivers?
It's a slo-mo car crash with a only handful of rubberneckers to watch its grim passage. But in case you think this is just an exercise in negativity, I would like to reassure you that there is one brilliantly shining silver lining to this dim and dreary cloud. It is so bad, so irredeemably fucking awful, that I am finally free from the addiction that started back in the year 2000. Thank you Endemol! Thank you, you shite-shovelling shitstains! Free at last, Free at last thank Bazelgette almighty, I'm free at last!
Saturday, January 13, 2007
The Sony Bravia Advert
The advert is totally the build up to orgasm and then the falling back into the fizzing afterglow. It is truly wonderful in its creation and execution. I could wax all Brian Sewell about the artistic genius of that piece. Its primitiveness, The way it appeals to the senses and emotions, the fact that I bet it triggers off the seratonin sensors and makes a whole heap of seratonins rush through your body. Fuck me, it should be entered for the Turner Prize and win. I have seen nothing in years that qualifies as a stunning and utterly effective piece of art - if one believes that art should appeal to the emotions and the senses - as well as that advert.
TODAY'S BIG BROTHER IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE LETTERS 'R' AND 'S'
Yet again Big Brother is facing accusations of racism from a proportion of its viewers and yet again it is hard to disagree with these accusations. It is not so much the casual racism that we see on our screens, but the lack of response to this by the producers and the hosts of the stable of shows that live off the main show. In fact it is more than silence, if anything the presenters seem terrified at the prospect of the subject being brought up and will quickly change the subject if it appears that discussion is heading that way. So what is going on?
Let's go back a bit through Big Brother history and identify some flash points. The first time it really reared its head was in Big Brother 3, when Adele - a black contestant - was the first contestant to be greeted by boos and jeers when she left the house. Was this racist? It would be too simple to see it as purely racist in origin, because Adele had broken the 'moral' rules that the voting audience demand be adhered to; she had bitched and was seen to be "two-faced". Much of the booing stemmed from this. However, the fact that she was female and had, to an extent, used her sexuality to manipulate, was also a factor. Did her colour have anything to do with her reception? I think it did. If Adele had been a sweet and 'uncontroversial' contestant, it is unlikely that her colour would have played a part in her reception. However, once she became 'controversial', her colour did start to matter. Maybe it allowed a deep seated mistrust to rise to the surface, seemingly justified by her behaviour - which was all well within the rules of what is after all a gameshow - but in reality predicated on ignorance and an unspoken dislike of people 'like her' who get above themselves.
Race was certainly an element in Big Brother 5, when there were violent scenes between Victor (black male) and Emma (white female). This time however, Big Brother did intervene. Frankly they had to, it had reached such a level that the show was in danger of exploding beyond their control. Emma was removed from the house and Victor remained. Big Brother could, and probably would, state that this is evidence of their refusal to tolerate racism within the house, but ... would they have intervened if the situation hadn't tipped over the edge into violence? What really prompted their actions, a desire to tackle racism or a desire to keep their show on the air? Victor emerged relatively unscathed, although he was evicted not long after, but I'll return to his 'unscathedness' later.
In Big Brother Six we saw some of the most appalling racist displays to date. Not so much because of what happened inside the house - although it was very clear to anyone with eyes and ears that Maxwell and Saskia both displayed pretty well developed racist attitudes - but outside the house when Makosi - An African woman - left the house on the final night. She was met with jeers, boos, and what can only be described as monkey noises. Davina McCall treated her as though she were a criminal for her behaviour inside the house - which had been a bit foolish at times, but was well within the rules of the game. Makosi wanted to win and did what she could to achieve that goal. - and made little or no attempt to control the baying crowd. It was a vile spectacle and one that the producers have never explained or seen fit to apologise for.
And we fast forward to this year's Celebrity Big Brother and we find an Indian contestant - Shilpa - subjected to abuse and bullying, which she might not realise is racist, but we the viewers, cannot help but know. Jackiey 'can't' say her name and refers to her as 'the Indian', constantly picks arguments with her, talks about her to the other housemates, portrays her as untrustworthy and fake in these conversations and acknowledges on leaving the house that she was close to being violent with her. Danielle calls Shilpa a dog and tells her that she's 'their cook', and Jack, pointless boyfriend of Jade, is heard to abuse her, saying he hates her, she is a wanker,and in something bleeped out by Big Brother, he appears to be calling her a 'Paki bitch'. Is this dealt with on BBBM or BBLB? Is Jackiey pulled up on her racism when she is interviewed by Davina McCall? Does anyone in the house dare to acknowledge that which only a fool could not percieve? No. After all, Jermaine Jackson is in the house and no one's picking on him, so it must be Shilpa's fault.
And this is where the 'S' word comes in to it. Throughout, it has been women who have been most likely to be at the receiving end of racist abuse that goes unchallenged. Victor emerged relatively unscathed because he was a man. Throughout, women who display their sexuality have been 'punished' for it. Throughout, attractive women who don't become one of the lads - Kate Lawler - are seen as 'slags' who need to be voted out. Men who succumb to these sexual displays or use their own sexuality to gain favour and votes are not punished. They can't be slags, they're men.
The voting audience for Big Brother is - apparently - mostly young and female, and this is - apparently - why women in the show are subject to harsher judgement than the male contestants. This is very probably true, and if true, is very sad. However, while this may be the case, it doesn't alter the fact that Big Brother plays to this demographic and in fact offers them victims along the way. They are the ones who control the edit, and it is clear to anyone who has ever watched the live feed and then seen an edit of events they watched unfold, that the producers manipulate episodes to favour some housemates and put others in a bad light. Big Brother cannot put words into a contestants mouth, but they can alter a context so that words and actions can be seen as far more damning than they actually were. They can make a victim of bullying appear to be an aggressor - Ashleyne - they can make a racist abuser - Jack - look strangely silent and just a bit of a lad. They can certainly edit out anyone they're not interested in and make it appear that the contestant adds nothing to the show, or they can limit how much they show of the negative effect that certain contestants - Nikki - have on the house.
Endemol would undoubtely argue that they cannot control the sexism shown my female viewers to female contestants. They would also argue that they are not sexist or racist and that they cannot control the elements of this to be found inside the house and in their audience. This would be disingenuous and craven. We know that they can and do control what goes on in the house, and when we see examples of racism, bullying and victimsation going unpunished, we see exactly how craven Big Brother really is. They do not want to alienate their core audience, and so seem happy to make a show that appeals to the worst in that audience and appalls anyone with even a vague sense of decency. Their cowardice is such that they seem unable to grasp the fact that they could quite easily attempt to influence their audience for the better, not by lecturing and hectoring, but by being seen to punish unacceptable behaviour, by not tolerating casual racism and by not whipping up a baying mob each and every eviction night and pretending that it's all just pantomime. Maybe it is for those involved, but its effect is to condone attitudes that should be challenged.
It is possible to make money and not sell ones soul to the Devil. Joseph Bazalgette worked on creating a sewer system that would reap health and social benefits for the whole of society, his great-grandson Peter puts sewage on our television screens.
Let's go back a bit through Big Brother history and identify some flash points. The first time it really reared its head was in Big Brother 3, when Adele - a black contestant - was the first contestant to be greeted by boos and jeers when she left the house. Was this racist? It would be too simple to see it as purely racist in origin, because Adele had broken the 'moral' rules that the voting audience demand be adhered to; she had bitched and was seen to be "two-faced". Much of the booing stemmed from this. However, the fact that she was female and had, to an extent, used her sexuality to manipulate, was also a factor. Did her colour have anything to do with her reception? I think it did. If Adele had been a sweet and 'uncontroversial' contestant, it is unlikely that her colour would have played a part in her reception. However, once she became 'controversial', her colour did start to matter. Maybe it allowed a deep seated mistrust to rise to the surface, seemingly justified by her behaviour - which was all well within the rules of what is after all a gameshow - but in reality predicated on ignorance and an unspoken dislike of people 'like her' who get above themselves.
Race was certainly an element in Big Brother 5, when there were violent scenes between Victor (black male) and Emma (white female). This time however, Big Brother did intervene. Frankly they had to, it had reached such a level that the show was in danger of exploding beyond their control. Emma was removed from the house and Victor remained. Big Brother could, and probably would, state that this is evidence of their refusal to tolerate racism within the house, but ... would they have intervened if the situation hadn't tipped over the edge into violence? What really prompted their actions, a desire to tackle racism or a desire to keep their show on the air? Victor emerged relatively unscathed, although he was evicted not long after, but I'll return to his 'unscathedness' later.
In Big Brother Six we saw some of the most appalling racist displays to date. Not so much because of what happened inside the house - although it was very clear to anyone with eyes and ears that Maxwell and Saskia both displayed pretty well developed racist attitudes - but outside the house when Makosi - An African woman - left the house on the final night. She was met with jeers, boos, and what can only be described as monkey noises. Davina McCall treated her as though she were a criminal for her behaviour inside the house - which had been a bit foolish at times, but was well within the rules of the game. Makosi wanted to win and did what she could to achieve that goal. - and made little or no attempt to control the baying crowd. It was a vile spectacle and one that the producers have never explained or seen fit to apologise for.
And we fast forward to this year's Celebrity Big Brother and we find an Indian contestant - Shilpa - subjected to abuse and bullying, which she might not realise is racist, but we the viewers, cannot help but know. Jackiey 'can't' say her name and refers to her as 'the Indian', constantly picks arguments with her, talks about her to the other housemates, portrays her as untrustworthy and fake in these conversations and acknowledges on leaving the house that she was close to being violent with her. Danielle calls Shilpa a dog and tells her that she's 'their cook', and Jack, pointless boyfriend of Jade, is heard to abuse her, saying he hates her, she is a wanker,and in something bleeped out by Big Brother, he appears to be calling her a 'Paki bitch'. Is this dealt with on BBBM or BBLB? Is Jackiey pulled up on her racism when she is interviewed by Davina McCall? Does anyone in the house dare to acknowledge that which only a fool could not percieve? No. After all, Jermaine Jackson is in the house and no one's picking on him, so it must be Shilpa's fault.
And this is where the 'S' word comes in to it. Throughout, it has been women who have been most likely to be at the receiving end of racist abuse that goes unchallenged. Victor emerged relatively unscathed because he was a man. Throughout, women who display their sexuality have been 'punished' for it. Throughout, attractive women who don't become one of the lads - Kate Lawler - are seen as 'slags' who need to be voted out. Men who succumb to these sexual displays or use their own sexuality to gain favour and votes are not punished. They can't be slags, they're men.
The voting audience for Big Brother is - apparently - mostly young and female, and this is - apparently - why women in the show are subject to harsher judgement than the male contestants. This is very probably true, and if true, is very sad. However, while this may be the case, it doesn't alter the fact that Big Brother plays to this demographic and in fact offers them victims along the way. They are the ones who control the edit, and it is clear to anyone who has ever watched the live feed and then seen an edit of events they watched unfold, that the producers manipulate episodes to favour some housemates and put others in a bad light. Big Brother cannot put words into a contestants mouth, but they can alter a context so that words and actions can be seen as far more damning than they actually were. They can make a victim of bullying appear to be an aggressor - Ashleyne - they can make a racist abuser - Jack - look strangely silent and just a bit of a lad. They can certainly edit out anyone they're not interested in and make it appear that the contestant adds nothing to the show, or they can limit how much they show of the negative effect that certain contestants - Nikki - have on the house.
Endemol would undoubtely argue that they cannot control the sexism shown my female viewers to female contestants. They would also argue that they are not sexist or racist and that they cannot control the elements of this to be found inside the house and in their audience. This would be disingenuous and craven. We know that they can and do control what goes on in the house, and when we see examples of racism, bullying and victimsation going unpunished, we see exactly how craven Big Brother really is. They do not want to alienate their core audience, and so seem happy to make a show that appeals to the worst in that audience and appalls anyone with even a vague sense of decency. Their cowardice is such that they seem unable to grasp the fact that they could quite easily attempt to influence their audience for the better, not by lecturing and hectoring, but by being seen to punish unacceptable behaviour, by not tolerating casual racism and by not whipping up a baying mob each and every eviction night and pretending that it's all just pantomime. Maybe it is for those involved, but its effect is to condone attitudes that should be challenged.
It is possible to make money and not sell ones soul to the Devil. Joseph Bazalgette worked on creating a sewer system that would reap health and social benefits for the whole of society, his great-grandson Peter puts sewage on our television screens.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
The (Un) Usual Suspects
CAROLE
Hardened hack we were all expecting to hate, but who's shown a canny understanding of the way the show works, takes an interest in everyone (and why not, journos don't get on by not being interested) and who actually seems quite nice. The woman who referred to The Princess of Our Hearts as a 'braindead bimbo' in a prescient column published on the day that Diana was braindeaded.
CLEO
Lovely, lovely Cleo who has breasts and everything. Famous for being Kenny Everett's sidekick. Beautiful, funny, clever and a pleasure to watch. I can say nothing bad about her.
DANIELLE
She's apparently famous for fucking Teddy Sheringham. Scouse who showed some initial promise once we'd got past sneering at her tit-jiggling ways, but no. Bland, talks about her Teddy all the time, bitches, cries, bores for Scouseland.
DIRK
Seemed to be a pretty cool guy until he said that the problem with the British is that we are all socialists. Now aside from his deeply conservative attitudes he does seem like a nice enough guy, but he's not MrT, and he looks like he has a saggy arse, so fuck 'im.
DONNY
Came into the house drunk as a skunk and seemed like the biggest twat the house had ever seen. Sobered up and it emerged that he wasn't really a twat at all, in fact he looked like a promising housemate until he made the very wise decision to leg it over the wall rather than "wait on a fucking moron and her family." Nice work, Donny. We sort of wish you'd stayed, but leaving the cunt soup that was developing was a very good move.
"H" IAN
Is he Ian, is he H? Is he a twat or has he just come out and emerged as rather a nice young man? Well bugger us backwards, H, the most annoying man in pop (probably) has turned out to be a bit of a sweetheart. I thought I'd want to kill him, I now accept that I might drink a pint with him. Just the one mind you.
JACK
Boyfriend of Jade, mostly mute.
JACKIEY
Jade's mother. A subhuman car wreck, a gammy-armed disgrace. Can't say "Shilpa" but can say "the Indian", can barely articulate the morass of 'thoughts' running through her feeble excuse for a mind. Ignorant, flatulent, racist, and with the voice of transgendered brickie. Lowest points: the racism (natch), the bullying (natch again) and wearing a see-through swimsuit and so inflicting her minging muff on a traumatised nation.
JADE
She's back and ... she's back. She seems more 'grounded' than in her previous incarnation, but please! Do we need to see this woman again. Do we fuck! Go away you pointless creature. I'm very pleased for her that she managed to do well for herself, and seeing her mother makes you realise what a lot she's had to overcome, but sweet baby Jesus WHY? Has so far been a bit sobby and snot-filled, but shows signs of becoming a manipulative bully all over again. This will probably happen sooner rather than later now that mommie dearest has departed the house.
JERMAINE
Michael's older brother. Quiet, shy, sweet and gentle. And black. Unlike his brother.
JO
S-Club lesbian. Probably. Seemed okay at first, but is prone to bitching, looking hard-faced and being a bit of a nonentity. Back to the dog-breeding Jo. Or, you know, say or do something interesting.
KEN
Ah, Ken. A British treasure resembling the Queen Mother without the crap dresses. Eccentric, a little arrogant, undoubtedly a bit of a toucher. Left after a few days with the family Goody proved an experience too far for the man who had lived through The Who and Oliver Reed.
LEO
A cunt. A pint-sized, pube-haired cunt of the highest order. Does not shut up, cannot shut up, will not shut up! This man can sap your will to live. If there is a Heaven, this man will undoubtedly make St Peter scream "Fuck off you utter cunt!" at the pearly gates, because there can be no one, no one who's ever lived who could stomach this shitstain for longer than a few seconds without considering a career in dwarf serial killing.
SHILPA
Bollywood princess. Seemed destined to be beautiful but bland, but has shown a feisty personality and a giggle that delights all who hear it. Subjected to Jackiey's racist bullying until last night when the heinous one was evicted from the house. Sweet and gentle, watching her with Jermaine is one of life's simple pleasures.
And later I will post something about the actual show. Thus far it's been such a car crash that my brain has refused to allow my fingers to type about it. Mostly reasoning that cathartic as it might seem at the time, repeatedly typing "fucking cunts, cunt, fuck, arse, shitehawk, fucking fuck fuck CUNT!" would not be a particularly creative use of my time.
Hardened hack we were all expecting to hate, but who's shown a canny understanding of the way the show works, takes an interest in everyone (and why not, journos don't get on by not being interested) and who actually seems quite nice. The woman who referred to The Princess of Our Hearts as a 'braindead bimbo' in a prescient column published on the day that Diana was braindeaded.
CLEO
Lovely, lovely Cleo who has breasts and everything. Famous for being Kenny Everett's sidekick. Beautiful, funny, clever and a pleasure to watch. I can say nothing bad about her.
DANIELLE
She's apparently famous for fucking Teddy Sheringham. Scouse who showed some initial promise once we'd got past sneering at her tit-jiggling ways, but no. Bland, talks about her Teddy all the time, bitches, cries, bores for Scouseland.
DIRK
Seemed to be a pretty cool guy until he said that the problem with the British is that we are all socialists.
DONNY
Came into the house drunk as a skunk and seemed like the biggest twat the house had ever seen. Sobered up and it emerged that he wasn't really a twat at all, in fact he looked like a promising housemate until he made the very wise decision to leg it over the wall rather than "wait on a fucking moron and her family." Nice work, Donny. We sort of wish you'd stayed, but leaving the cunt soup that was developing was a very good move.
"H" IAN
Is he Ian, is he H? Is he a twat or has he just come out and emerged as rather a nice young man? Well bugger us backwards, H, the most annoying man in pop (probably) has turned out to be a bit of a sweetheart. I thought I'd want to kill him, I now accept that I might drink a pint with him. Just the one mind you.
JACK
Boyfriend of Jade, mostly mute.
JACKIEY
Jade's mother. A subhuman car wreck, a gammy-armed disgrace. Can't say "Shilpa" but can say "the Indian", can barely articulate the morass of 'thoughts' running through her feeble excuse for a mind. Ignorant, flatulent, racist, and with the voice of transgendered brickie. Lowest points: the racism (natch), the bullying (natch again) and wearing a see-through swimsuit and so inflicting her minging muff on a traumatised nation.
JADE
She's back and ... she's back. She seems more 'grounded' than in her previous incarnation, but please! Do we need to see this woman again. Do we fuck! Go away you pointless creature. I'm very pleased for her that she managed to do well for herself, and seeing her mother makes you realise what a lot she's had to overcome, but sweet baby Jesus WHY? Has so far been a bit sobby and snot-filled, but shows signs of becoming a manipulative bully all over again. This will probably happen sooner rather than later now that mommie dearest has departed the house.
JERMAINE
Michael's older brother. Quiet, shy, sweet and gentle. And black. Unlike his brother.
JO
S-Club lesbian. Probably. Seemed okay at first, but is prone to bitching, looking hard-faced and being a bit of a nonentity. Back to the dog-breeding Jo. Or, you know, say or do something interesting.
KEN
Ah, Ken. A British treasure resembling the Queen Mother without the crap dresses. Eccentric, a little arrogant, undoubtedly a bit of a toucher. Left after a few days with the family Goody proved an experience too far for the man who had lived through The Who and Oliver Reed.
LEO
A cunt. A pint-sized, pube-haired cunt of the highest order. Does not shut up, cannot shut up, will not shut up! This man can sap your will to live. If there is a Heaven, this man will undoubtedly make St Peter scream "Fuck off you utter cunt!" at the pearly gates, because there can be no one, no one who's ever lived who could stomach this shitstain for longer than a few seconds without considering a career in dwarf serial killing.
SHILPA
Bollywood princess. Seemed destined to be beautiful but bland, but has shown a feisty personality and a giggle that delights all who hear it. Subjected to Jackiey's racist bullying until last night when the heinous one was evicted from the house. Sweet and gentle, watching her with Jermaine is one of life's simple pleasures.
And later I will post something about the actual show. Thus far it's been such a car crash that my brain has refused to allow my fingers to type about it. Mostly reasoning that cathartic as it might seem at the time, repeatedly typing "fucking cunts, cunt, fuck, arse, shitehawk, fucking fuck fuck CUNT!" would not be a particularly creative use of my time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)