The sudden destruction or removal of statues and monuments generally happens when a nation has suffered defeat in war or been overturned by a revolution.
For this to happen in a few days either directly due to the actions of a mob or out of fear of them is disquieting because it betokens that kind of top-to-bottom upheaval.
In an democracy, the memorials of history don't just get destroyed or removed without the slightest hint of due process or democratic consent. I own a listed building, and I can't change the roof tiles without due process - but Khan gets to rip a Grade I-listed statue off its foundations by fiat? Rioters get to destroy a Grade-II listed statue because their feelings were hurt? No, that's not how it works in a civilized country.
So after days of PB Tory pearl-clutching about a statue being torn down by a mob, and oh, why didn't they get it taken down legally and legitimately, now a statue is taken down legally by the mayor of London, and, surprise surprise, the goalposts move.
It's illegal to move a Grade-I listed monument without gaining listed building consent first. Which part of that do you not understand?
If the monument is the bit that is listed.. As I've already shown it is the warehouses that are listed not the statue.
If the statue is within the curtilage of a listed building - which it most certainly was - then it will be protected by the listing as well. That's standard in conservation law.
If there's any doubt at all about the matter, the local conservation officers need to be consulted to adjudicate as to what the relationship between the statue and the listed building is (the fact that the statue wasn't there at the time of listing does not prevent it being protected by the listed once it is in place).
I'd be very surprised if Khan followed due process and got all that done within the space of a few days.
(5)In this Act “listed building” means a building which is for the time being included in a list compiled or approved by the Secretary of State under this section; and for the purposes of this Act—
(a)any object or structure fixed to the building;
(b)any object or structure within the curtilage of the building which, although not fixed to the building, forms part of the land and has done so since before lst July 1948,
LOL nevermind! What squirrel will he point to next?
My actual objection to the removal - that historical monuments should not be removed for the sake of transient political advantage or pressure from a mob, both of which apply to Khan's action here.
Both objections are arguments against democracy.
There is nothing new to statues coming down. Nothing whatsoever. People are acting hysterically like some horrendous rubicon is being crossed, like Pandora's Box is being opened.
Statues have always come down as well as gone up. They will continue to do so.
For democracy to work you need to give the electorate some prior notice of what you're going to do in office. Leaving the EU after winning an election on that basis is perfectly democratic, to do so without having campaigned on it in advance would be monstrous. Ditto the removal of the common historic fabric of this country without giving the electorate a prior indication of that policy.
Not really, because you have to react to events. Can't remember the Tory Party winning a mandate to close all our pubs. In fact if they'd put that in the manifesto I'd wager the Red Wall would have held and it would be PM Corbyn.
See my reply to Philip above your post - there's no such thing as a statue-removal emergency.
Can I take this as a challenge to come up with something a Tory government has done which was both not in a manifesto and not an emergency?
Hope so because I reckon I'm up to that. The only slightly tricky part will be which one to pick.
The conditions are:
1. Not in a manifesto. 2. Not an emergency. 3. An act of cultural vandalism. 4. Conducted in support of an act of illegal cultural vandalism by a mob.
Incidentally for those complaining about ulterior motives of BLM please stop and pause for a second and think about Rotherham.
In Rotherham because of who was raising concerns and their perceived ulterior motives, the legitimate concerns about grooming and rape were ignored for years leading to avoidable harm to many victims of it.
Do you support what happened in Rotherham?
If not, pause for a second and think are you sure you want to repeat the same with BLM. If BLM have both legitimate grievances and ulterior motives (allegedly) or the people behind it do, the solution is not to ignore them and wish it all away. The solution is not to worry about a slippery slope and "where does it stop".
The solution has to be to deal with the legitimate grievances, while fighting any illegitimate ones. That may be harder to do, but its the right thing to do.
We can agree that the slave trade is something to be ashamed of, and be happy to see statues pulled down without having to ignore the fact the current protests are on behalf of the extreme left and are also a great way of pushing the rest of their communist agenda. Their agenda isn't even necessarily bad, people are attracted to Marxism, it is taught in our Universities.
The extreme left may be involved in the current protests, but then the extreme left loves to join in to protests in general. That's not what the protests are about though, ignore them just like Brexit isn't about the extreme right however much Mr Meeks likes to insinuate it is.
When I was a student I marched against Top Up Fees in London when there was talk about Blair increasing the fees from the £1000 I was paying to potentially up to £10,000 and was disappointed to so many joining in the march waving irrelevant placards like Palestine or Socialist Workers etc - they were jumping on the bandwagon but I wasn't protesting for socialism or against Palestine.
As far as I can tell, the Black Lives Movement advocates a mix of reasonable and unreasonable policies.. It's not just a case of finding that unsavoury elements latch on to a reasonable cause, like opposition to tuitions fees.
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
Not really understanding the outrage. And you are genuinely outraged, I can feel it, it's not some sort of reverse virtue-signalling.
So I'm hoping to be allowed to probe.
Are you worried about "where we draw the line" or about the drawing of any line at all?
To help answer, I would ask you to consider that -
On The Buses is never repeated. Neither is Love Thy Neighbour. The name of the dog - "N*gg*r" - in the Battle Of Britain film is now edited out. We get no opportunity these days to enjoy the Black & White Minstrels. Jim Davison is effectively banned from primetime TV. The late great Bernard Manning has been relegated to YouTube. There are warnings published for LOADS of works from the past that contain outmoded racist stereoptyes.
Are you unhappy with all the above and wish to see it reversed?
Or do you think this process of revisionism should simply STOP - right here and right NOW - because iyo the line has been drawn in exactly the right place?
@kinabulu, I will answer your questions as long as you answer mine - because I'm not sensing where you'd draw the line the other way either?
My posts today have been about a series of shows either being pulled for good, or temporarily with a promise they'll come back with a warning. I don't see why Little Britain should fall into the former category, or Dumbo the latter, and I expect more and more of this in the days and weeks to come.
The way you've phrased it is slightly out-of-date. I'd draw a distinction between a live broadcast to everyone and available on streaming by personal selection, which I view on drawing from a library.
(1) Dambusters - warning at start. Live broadcast and streaming ok. It's a very important film and part of our cultural heritage. (2) Love Thy Neighbour - very strong warning at start. Possibly some edits. Streaming ok with consent box. I also watched it after reading on here how awful it was: it satires the openly racist views held at the time. (3) Jim Davidson - warning. Streaming ok. (4) Bernard Manning - youtube only.
I haven't heard of On The Buses.
Now, let me ask you: are you ok with Men Behaving Badly, I'm Alan Partridge, League of Gentlemen, The Office, Snow White, Fantasia and Alice in Wonderland staying up too?
Because I can guarantee you some will find something to offend in those too.
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
Not really understanding the outrage. And you are genuinely outraged, I can feel it, it's not some sort of reverse virtue-signalling.
So I'm hoping to be allowed to probe.
Are you worried about "where we draw the line" or about the drawing of any line at all?
To help answer, I would ask you to consider that -
On The Buses is never repeated. Neither is Love Thy Neighbour. The name of the dog - "N*gg*r" - in the Battle Of Britain film is now edited out. We get no opportunity these days to enjoy the Black & White Minstrels. Jim Davison is effectively banned from primetime TV. The late great Bernard Manning has been relegated to YouTube. There are warnings published for LOADS of works from the past that contain outmoded racist stereoptyes.
Are you unhappy with all the above and wish to see it reversed?
Or do you think this process of revisionism should simply STOP - right here and right NOW - because iyo the line has been drawn in exactly the right place?
Just for accuracy the dog was from The Dambusters not BoB. :-)
This argument about schools and whose fault it is they aren't back - listen to the PM when he breathlessly bangs the dispatch box. 2m distancing is here to stay. And 2m spacing Means Schools Cant Go Back. Not because of teachers. Because there isnt physical space in schools to bring all students back and have 2m spacing.
Why are the teachers saying it's unsafe? Because 2m spacing requirements of the government say it's unsafe...
I cannot understand why the WHO insist one metre spacing is safe
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
"Frankly my dear, I don't give a d*mn"
Would you advocate putting up re-runs of "Love Thy Neighbour" because it displays the race humour prevalent in the 1970s and therefore should stand as representative of its time? What about Alf Garnet who was considered by many to be beyond the pale when it was broadcast in the 60s and 70s?
Sometimes things outlive their era. Besides, Hollywood will remake it, they always do.
I've constantly seen "Love thy neighbour" referenced in these sorts of discussions so I thought I'd watch the pilot on youtube. The show, so far as I can tell has Eddie as the main character we're laughing at with his stuck in his ways racist attitude toward his new Tory neighbour Bill.......
And?
Trust me, there are episodes of that show that, if broadcast today, would result in writs being issued.
People have been banned on here for using the "N" word - what about a show that constantly uses it?
Blazing Saddles was a movie about the triumph of BLM against outright bigotry, but I doubt it will be getting rebroadcast any time soon.
Which is a pity because it's a wonderful film that parodies the stupidity of racism rather than its wickedness.
Coming back to Death Do Us Part, I don't think it was actually that good. The early episodes were the best, but these were the ones in which the ambivalence of the Alf character was nicely protrayed. Speight broadened the parody later as he became aware than Alf was becoming something of a hero in some quarters. Art lost out to political correctness as a consequence.
As for Othello, maybe it's time for a production emphasisng how the hero was perhaps just a bit too sensitive?
The best version I have ever seen of Othello had Iago played by a black actor. Can't remember his name but he was fantastic in the role
I was lucky enough to see Sir Laurence Olivier paly the part, but that was back in the days when 'blacking up' was controversial.
I think you meant not controversial...
Yes, I didn't spot the omission in time. Thank you.
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
So is a Blue Plaque to a Chairman of the Eugenics Society acceptable?
What is the role of the blue plaque?
"London’s blue plaques scheme, run by English Heritage, celebrates the links between notable figures of the past and the buildings in which they lived and worked. "
So, is it reasonable to celebtrate a Chairman of the Eugenics Society?
Do they commemorate Aldous Huxley?
if so, difficult to see how his brother doesn’t qualify given they were equally prominent and had similar views.
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
"Frankly my dear, I don't give a d*mn"
Would you advocate putting up re-runs of "Love Thy Neighbour" because it displays the race humour prevalent in the 1970s and therefore should stand as representative of its time? What about Alf Garnet who was considered by many to be beyond the pale when it was broadcast in the 60s and 70s?
Sometimes things outlive their era. Besides, Hollywood will remake it, they always do.
I've constantly seen "Love thy neighbour" referenced in these sorts of discussions so I thought I'd watch the pilot on youtube. The show, so far as I can tell has Eddie as the main character we're laughing at with his stuck in his ways racist attitude toward his new Tory neighbour Bill.......
And?
Trust me, there are episodes of that show that, if broadcast today, would result in writs being issued.
People have been banned on here for using the "N" word - what about a show that constantly uses it?
Blazing Saddles was a movie about the triumph of BLM against outright bigotry, but I doubt it will be getting rebroadcast any time soon.
Which is a pity because it's a wonderful film that parodies the stupidity of racism rather than its wickedness.
Coming back to Death Do Us Part, I don't think it was actually that good. The early episodes were the best, but these were the ones in which the ambivalence of the Alf character was nicely protrayed. Speight broadened the parody later as he became aware than Alf was becoming something of a hero in some quarters. Art lost out to political correctness as a consequence.
As for Othello, maybe it's time for a production emphasisng how the hero was perhaps just a bit too sensitive?
The best version I have ever seen of Othello had Iago played by a black actor. Can't remember his name but he was fantastic in the role
I was lucky enough to see Sir Laurence Olivier paly the part, but that was back in the days when 'blacking up' was controversial.
I think you meant not controversial...
I thought it was still uncontroversial - Justin Trudeau, lefty icon and Leader of the Free World blacked up all the time!
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
Not really understanding the outrage. And you are genuinely outraged, I can feel it, it's not some sort of reverse virtue-signalling.
So I'm hoping to be allowed to probe.
Are you worried about "where we draw the line" or about the drawing of any line at all?
To help answer, I would ask you to consider that -
On The Buses is never repeated. Neither is Love Thy Neighbour. The name of the dog - "N*gg*r" - in the Battle Of Britain film is now edited out. We get no opportunity these days to enjoy the Black & White Minstrels. Jim Davison is effectively banned from primetime TV. The late great Bernard Manning has been relegated to YouTube. There are warnings published for LOADS of works from the past that contain outmoded racist stereoptyes.
Are you unhappy with all the above and wish to see it reversed?
Or do you think this process of revisionism should simply STOP - right here and right NOW - because iyo the line has been drawn in exactly the right place?
@kinabulu, I will answer your questions as long as you answer mine - because I'm not sensing where you'd draw the line the other way either?
My posts today have been about a series of shows either being pulled for good, or temporarily with a promise they'll come back with a warning. I don't see why Little Britain should fall into the former category, or Dumbo the latter, and I expect more and more of this in the days and weeks to come.
The way you've phrased it is slightly out-of-date. I'd draw a distinction between a live broadcast to everyone and available on streaming by personal selection, which I view on drawing from a library.
(1) Dambusters - warning at start. Live broadcast and streaming ok. It's a very important film and part of our cultural heritage. (2) Love Thy Neighbour - very strong warning at start. Possibly some edits. Streaming ok with consent box. I also watched it after reading on here how awful it was: it satires the openly racist views held at the time. (3) Jim Davidson - warning. Streaming ok. (4) Bernard Manning - youtube only.
I haven't heard of On The Buses.
Now, let me ask you: are you ok with Men Behaving Badly, I'm Alan Partridge, League of Gentlemen, The Office, Snow White, Fantasia and Alice in Wonderland staying up too?
Because I can guarantee you some will find something to offend in those too.
Lady And The Tramp is a real shocker too! Believe me.
Need to get back to my writing but I find it almost impossible now to watch the Fire Drill aka Germans episode of Fawlty Towers. It's not that bit. It's what the Major says.
In fact, there's a fair bit in Fawlty Towers that really isn't funny any longer. Beating up a 'dago twat' as he is called by Cleese is just not acceptable.
Narrow win for Starmer. Lack of a proper plan on schools seems the main issue regardless of which side of the argument you're on. And that's down to the Gov't.
The sudden destruction or removal of statues and monuments generally happens when a nation has suffered defeat in war or been overturned by a revolution.
For this to happen in a few days either directly due to the actions of a mob or out of fear of them is disquieting because it betokens that kind of top-to-bottom upheaval.
In an democracy, the memorials of history don't just get destroyed or removed without the slightest hint of due process or democratic consent. I own a listed building, and I can't change the roof tiles without due process - but Khan gets to rip a Grade I-listed statue off its foundations by fiat? Rioters get to destroy a Grade-II listed statue because their feelings were hurt? No, that's not how it works in a civilized country.
So after days of PB Tory pearl-clutching about a statue being torn down by a mob, and oh, why didn't they get it taken down legally and legitimately, now a statue is taken down legally by the mayor of London, and, surprise surprise, the goalposts move.
It's illegal to move a Grade-I listed monument without gaining listed building consent first. Which part of that do you not understand?
If the monument is the bit that is listed.. As I've already shown it is the warehouses that are listed not the statue.
If the statue is within the curtilage of a listed building - which it most certainly was - then it will be protected by the listing as well. That's standard in conservation law.
If there's any doubt at all about the matter, the local conservation officers need to be consulted to adjudicate as to what the relationship between the statue and the listed building is (the fact that the statue wasn't there at the time of listing does not prevent it being protected by the listed once it is in place).
I'd be very surprised if Khan followed due process and got all that done within the space of a few days.
(5)In this Act “listed building” means a building which is for the time being included in a list compiled or approved by the Secretary of State under this section; and for the purposes of this Act—
(a)any object or structure fixed to the building;
(b)any object or structure within the curtilage of the building which, although not fixed to the building, forms part of the land and has done so since before lst July 1948,
LOL nevermind! What squirrel will he point to next?
My actual objection to the removal - that historical monuments should not be removed for the sake of transient political advantage or pressure from a mob, both of which apply to Khan's action here.
Both objections are arguments against democracy.
There is nothing new to statues coming down. Nothing whatsoever. People are acting hysterically like some horrendous rubicon is being crossed, like Pandora's Box is being opened.
Statues have always come down as well as gone up. They will continue to do so.
For democracy to work you need to give the electorate some prior notice of what you're going to do in office. Leaving the EU after winning an election on that basis is perfectly democratic, to do so without having campaigned on it in advance would be monstrous. Ditto the removal of the common historic fabric of this country without giving the electorate a prior indication of that policy.
Not really, because you have to react to events. Can't remember the Tory Party winning a mandate to close all our pubs. In fact if they'd put that in the manifesto I'd wager the Red Wall would have held and it would be PM Corbyn.
See my reply to Philip above your post - there's no such thing as a statue-removal emergency.
Can I take this as a challenge to come up with something a Tory government has done which was both not in a manifesto and not an emergency?
Hope so because I reckon I'm up to that. The only slightly tricky part will be which one to pick.
The conditions are:
1. Not in a manifesto. 2. Not an emergency. 3. An act of cultural vandalism. 4. Conducted in support of an act of illegal cultural vandalism by a mob.
Good luck with the challenge.
Pass - I know a fool's errand when I see one.
But we have you back in "it's wrong cos I think it's wrong" territory, which I sense is the best we can hope for.
Need to get back to my writing but I find it almost impossible now to watch the Fire Drill aka Germans episode of Fawlty Towers. It's not that bit. It's what the Major says.
In fact, there's a fair bit in Fawlty Towers that really isn't funny any longer. Beating up a 'dago twat' as he is called by Cleese is just not acceptable.
Speaking of which, I've noticed a lot lately how much of Monty Python and Fawlty Towers is basically humour based on other people's disabilities: mocking someone who stutters or who has a lisp (Life of Brian), a deaf woman (whole episode of Fawlty Towers), someone who can't speak good English (most of Fawlty Towers).
Need to get back to my writing but I find it almost impossible now to watch the Fire Drill aka Germans episode of Fawlty Towers. It's not that bit. It's what the Major says.
In fact, there's a fair bit in Fawlty Towers that really isn't funny any longer. Beating up a 'dago twat' as he is called by Cleese is just not acceptable.
Narrow win for Starmer. Lack of a proper plan on schools seems the main issue regardless of which side of the argument you're on. And that's down to the Gov't.
I think that's actually a fair assessment. He wasn't great but neither was Boris particularly.
This argument about schools and whose fault it is they aren't back - listen to the PM when he breathlessly bangs the dispatch box. 2m distancing is here to stay. And 2m spacing Means Schools Cant Go Back. Not because of teachers. Because there isnt physical space in schools to bring all students back and have 2m spacing.
Why are the teachers saying it's unsafe? Because 2m spacing requirements of the government say it's unsafe...
I cannot understand why the WHO insist one metre spacing is safe
We're sticking with 2m. And that means it is unsafe according to the government's own guidance to schools for them to reopen. The very best we can hope for is 2 days a week from September. My eldest son has also now dropped the idea of university in September. It's pretty clear now that students are going to be as stuffed by 2m spacing as school pupils.
This argument about schools and whose fault it is they aren't back - listen to the PM when he breathlessly bangs the dispatch box. 2m distancing is here to stay. And 2m spacing Means Schools Cant Go Back. Not because of teachers. Because there isnt physical space in schools to bring all students back and have 2m spacing.
Why are the teachers saying it's unsafe? Because 2m spacing requirements of the government say it's unsafe...
I cannot understand why the WHO insist one metre spacing is safe
Almost as though you are not a health care professional nor have ever worked in health-related occupations.
Under the lights it's pretty clear that a lot of pink scalp can be seen under the PMs weave. He let's the hair go everywhere to disguise his baldness doesn't he. Why bother?
Speaking of which, I've noticed a lot lately how much of Monty Python and Fawlty Towers is basically humour based on other people's disabilities: mocking someone who stutters or who has a lisp (Life of Brian), a deaf woman (whole episode of Fawlty Towers), someone who can't speak good English (most of Fawlty Towers).
Funny in the 1970's. Crap in 2020.
Nope. The joke is on Basil Fawlty who is intolerant and has no understanding. Same as Alan Partridge or David Brent.
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
The Chancellor of Oxford University rightly doesn't need to give a damn about their attempts to police speech.
Bit of a dinosaur to be frank.
At least his friend Michael Portillo has moved with the times. His Empire Journeys series on Channel 5 is superb and should be mandatory viewing for every British citizen.
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
"Frankly my dear, I don't give a d*mn"
Would you advocate putting up re-runs of "Love Thy Neighbour" because it displays the race humour prevalent in the 1970s and therefore should stand as representative of its time? What about Alf Garnet who was considered by many to be beyond the pale when it was broadcast in the 60s and 70s?
Sometimes things outlive their era. Besides, Hollywood will remake it, they always do.
I've constantly seen "Love thy neighbour" referenced in these sorts of discussions so I thought I'd watch the pilot on youtube. The show, so far as I can tell has Eddie as the main character we're laughing at with his stuck in his ways racist attitude toward his new Tory neighbour Bill.......
And?
Trust me, there are episodes of that show that, if broadcast today, would result in writs being issued.
People have been banned on here for using the "N" word - what about a show that constantly uses it?
Blazing Saddles was a movie about the triumph of BLM against outright bigotry, but I doubt it will be getting rebroadcast any time soon.
Which is a pity because it's a wonderful film that parodies the stupidity of racism rather than its wickedness.
Coming back to Death Do Us Part, I don't think it was actually that good. The early episodes were the best, but these were the ones in which the ambivalence of the Alf character was nicely protrayed. Speight broadened the parody later as he became aware than Alf was becoming something of a hero in some quarters. Art lost out to political correctness as a consequence.
As for Othello, maybe it's time for a production emphasisng how the hero was perhaps just a bit too sensitive?
The best version I have ever seen of Othello had Iago played by a black actor. Can't remember his name but he was fantastic in the role
I was lucky enough to see Sir Laurence Olivier paly the part, but that was back in the days when 'blacking up' was controversial.
Off Topic and Spoiler Alert.
Playing the QI game with the family last night, one of the true or false questions that came up was 'Did the Metropolitan Police have their own Black and White Minstrel troupe for some thirty years?'
The answer was yes, talk about institutionalised racism!
"We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.
We build a space that affirms Black women and is free from sexism, misogyny, and environments in which men are centered.
We practice empathy. We engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts.
We make our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children. We dismantle the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” so that they can mother in private even as they participate in public justice work.
We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise)."
The lingo might be a bit offputting to some so a translation is, I think, useful -
We create places where Black women can live free of the shit they usually have to put up. We treat everybody good and try to learn from each other. We allow women to work by providing an environment where their kids are safe - e.g. child-care in the community so they don't have to rely on a bloke. We are blind to sexuality. Gay, straight, neither, it's all the same to us.
Certainly some food for thought there. A mix of things I like a lot with other things that I very much don't. Much of it is utopian - or dystopian depending how you feel about the vision.
Can you imagine how crap the people he smashed must be then?
Ok - won an 80 seat majority, yes - I didn`t mean "crap" at everything and during all times. I was watching PMQs when I posted and think he is crap at this point in time. Starmer is trounching him - but then again being LoTO at this time is a gift for him.
Three takeaways from PMQs: 1. Johnson believing the government threw its arms aroundt he country and could not have tackled the coronavirus crisis any better is not going to play well. 2. It's really not a good idea for Johnson to allow himself tpo be painted as Trump's poodle - even if he is. 3. There will be a u-turn on funding free meals for the most vulnerable children in England.
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
"Frankly my dear, I don't give a d*mn"
Would you advocate putting up re-runs of "Love Thy Neighbour" because it displays the race humour prevalent in the 1970s and therefore should stand as representative of its time? What about Alf Garnet who was considered by many to be beyond the pale when it was broadcast in the 60s and 70s?
Sometimes things outlive their era. Besides, Hollywood will remake it, they always do.
I've constantly seen "Love thy neighbour" referenced in these sorts of discussions so I thought I'd watch the pilot on youtube. The show, so far as I can tell has Eddie as the main character we're laughing at with his stuck in his ways racist attitude toward his new Tory neighbour Bill.......
And?
Trust me, there are episodes of that show that, if broadcast today, would result in writs being issued.
People have been banned on here for using the "N" word - what about a show that constantly uses it?
Blazing Saddles was a movie about the triumph of BLM against outright bigotry, but I doubt it will be getting rebroadcast any time soon.
Which is a pity because it's a wonderful film that parodies the stupidity of racism rather than its wickedness.
Coming back to Death Do Us Part, I don't think it was actually that good. The early episodes were the best, but these were the ones in which the ambivalence of the Alf character was nicely protrayed. Speight broadened the parody later as he became aware than Alf was becoming something of a hero in some quarters. Art lost out to political correctness as a consequence.
As for Othello, maybe it's time for a production emphasisng how the hero was perhaps just a bit too sensitive?
The best version I have ever seen of Othello had Iago played by a black actor. Can't remember his name but he was fantastic in the role
I was lucky enough to see Sir Laurence Olivier paly the part, but that was back in the days when 'blacking up' was controversial.
Off Topic and Spoiler Alert.
Playing the QI game with the family last night, one of the true or false questions that came up was 'Did the Metropolitan Police have their own Black and White Minstrel troupe for some thirty years?'
The answer was yes, talk about institutionalised racism!
This argument about schools and whose fault it is they aren't back - listen to the PM when he breathlessly bangs the dispatch box. 2m distancing is here to stay. And 2m spacing Means Schools Cant Go Back. Not because of teachers. Because there isnt physical space in schools to bring all students back and have 2m spacing.
Why are the teachers saying it's unsafe? Because 2m spacing requirements of the government say it's unsafe...
I cannot understand why the WHO insist one metre spacing is safe
We're sticking with 2m. And that means it is unsafe according to the government's own guidance to schools for them to reopen. The very best we can hope for is 2 days a week from September. My eldest son has also now dropped the idea of university in September. It's pretty clear now that students are going to be as stuffed by 2m spacing as school pupils.
I think it is very hard for students but expect Universities are going to experience an enormous structural change with on line courses becoming the new normal for the future
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
And the genuine article - a real colonial governor. My man for PM.
Good man.
From an era when Conservatives really were Conservatives. He makes todays lot look like a bunch of numpties
Need to get back to my writing but I find it almost impossible now to watch the Fire Drill aka Germans episode of Fawlty Towers. It's not that bit. It's what the Major says.
In fact, there's a fair bit in Fawlty Towers that really isn't funny any longer. Beating up a 'dago twat' as he is called by Cleese is just not acceptable.
I’ve seen the scene you make. The point of it is that even Fawlty is shocked by such pedantic racist attitudes by a real bigot.
For today’s audiences that’s why you carry the warnings.
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
The Chancellor of Oxford University rightly doesn't need to give a damn about their attempts to police speech.
And wtf does it mean to pronounce a foreigner's name correctly? Do we have to mimic the accent of that country? By that standard, how many of us correctly pronounce Putin, Maduro or Qaddafi?
If I tried to pronounced Mandela's name as would his family and closest friends while otherwise pronouncing everything in my normal British accent, at the very least I'd come across a disrespectful, pretentious idiot.
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
Not really understanding the outrage. And you are genuinely outraged, I can feel it, it's not some sort of reverse virtue-signalling.
So I'm hoping to be allowed to probe.
Are you worried about "where we draw the line" or about the drawing of any line at all?
To help answer, I would ask you to consider that -
On The Buses is never repeated. Neither is Love Thy Neighbour. The name of the dog - "N*gg*r" - in the Battle Of Britain film is now edited out. We get no opportunity these days to enjoy the Black & White Minstrels. Jim Davison is effectively banned from primetime TV. The late great Bernard Manning has been relegated to YouTube. There are warnings published for LOADS of works from the past that contain outmoded racist stereoptyes.
Are you unhappy with all the above and wish to see it reversed?
Or do you think this process of revisionism should simply STOP - right here and right NOW - because iyo the line has been drawn in exactly the right place?
@kinabulu, I will answer your questions as long as you answer mine - because I'm not sensing where you'd draw the line the other way either?
My posts today have been about a series of shows either being pulled for good, or temporarily with a promise they'll come back with a warning. I don't see why Little Britain should fall into the former category, or Dumbo the latter, and I expect more and more of this in the days and weeks to come.
The way you've phrased it is slightly out-of-date. I'd draw a distinction between a live broadcast to everyone and available on streaming by personal selection, which I view on drawing from a library.
(1) Dambusters - warning at start. Live broadcast and streaming ok. It's a very important film and part of our cultural heritage. (2) Love Thy Neighbour - very strong warning at start. Possibly some edits. Streaming ok with consent box. I also watched it after reading on here how awful it was: it satires the openly racist views held at the time. (3) Jim Davidson - warning. Streaming ok. (4) Bernard Manning - youtube only.
I haven't heard of On The Buses.
Now, let me ask you: are you ok with Men Behaving Badly, I'm Alan Partridge, League of Gentlemen, The Office, Snow White, Fantasia and Alice in Wonderland staying up too?
Because I can guarantee you some will find something to offend in those too.
Lady And The Tramp is a real shocker too! Believe me.
Can you imagine how crap the people he smashed must be then?
Ok - won an 80 seat majority, yes - I didn`t mean "crap" at everything and during all times. I was watching PMQs when I posted and think he is crap at this point in time. Starmer is trounching him - but then again being LoTO at this time is a gift for him.
To be honest, the government is facing about three existential crises at the same time in almost unprecedented peacetime adversity. If Starmer couldn't score the odd point under those circumstances, he'd really have to hand in his LOTO badge, pack up, and go home.
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
Good man.
Peter Hitchens goes one step further
"More than 1,000 protesters gathered outside a college of Oxford University on Tuesday, demanding the removal of a statue of 19th-century British colonialist Cecil Rhodes.
Organizers from the Rhodes Must Fall campaign group drew chalk crosses on both sides of the street as people gathered around the college's entrance, according to the BBC.
Protesters chanted, "Take it down" and held silence for 8 minutes, 46 seconds to honor George Floyd, which was the same length a white Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck before he died. Peter Hitchens, a prominent conservative columnist for Mail on Sunday, was among the very few in the crowd who did not take a knee.
Hundreds of people took a knee on Oxford High St for 8 mins 46 secs.
Everyone except Peter Hitchens 😒 #RhodesMustFall pic.twitter.com/qYulcpvXiZ
So is a Blue Plaque to a Chairman of the Eugenics Society acceptable?
What is the role of the blue plaque?
"London’s blue plaques scheme, run by English Heritage, celebrates the links between notable figures of the past and the buildings in which they lived and worked. "
So, is it reasonable to celebtrate a Chairman of the Eugenics Society?
To be pedantic that means they are celebrating the link to the building and the criteria is that the person was notable.
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
And the genuine article - a real colonial governor. My man for PM.
Good man.
From an era when Conservatives really were Conservatives. He makes todays lot look like a bunch of numpties
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
This is what I suspected. His party and the far left MPs will drag him down and stop him getting into power. They might be backbenchers now rather than shadow ministers but thanks to social media they have a louder voice than ever and they will continue to scare the moderate horses into the arms of Boris or Sunak.
This argument about schools and whose fault it is they aren't back - listen to the PM when he breathlessly bangs the dispatch box. 2m distancing is here to stay. And 2m spacing Means Schools Cant Go Back. Not because of teachers. Because there isnt physical space in schools to bring all students back and have 2m spacing.
Why are the teachers saying it's unsafe? Because 2m spacing requirements of the government say it's unsafe...
I cannot understand why the WHO insist one metre spacing is safe
Almost as though you are not a health care professional nor have ever worked in health-related occupations.
The point is WHO recommend a metre our scientists 2 metres
This argument about schools and whose fault it is they aren't back - listen to the PM when he breathlessly bangs the dispatch box. 2m distancing is here to stay. And 2m spacing Means Schools Cant Go Back. Not because of teachers. Because there isnt physical space in schools to bring all students back and have 2m spacing.
Why are the teachers saying it's unsafe? Because 2m spacing requirements of the government say it's unsafe...
I cannot understand why the WHO insist one metre spacing is safe
We're sticking with 2m. And that means it is unsafe according to the government's own guidance to schools for them to reopen. The very best we can hope for is 2 days a week from September. My eldest son has also now dropped the idea of university in September. It's pretty clear now that students are going to be as stuffed by 2m spacing as school pupils.
My recollection was that there was some German research which showed for those sitting beside each other 1m was a safe distance, for those walking with each other 1.4m and for runners something like 10m, all based on the likely reach of any plume of virus. It always comes to mind when joggers pass me on my walks. Clearly someone coughing or sneezing may need more than 1m (or a mask). I am just not aware of any research that backs the 2m gap and yet it is a major source of our challenges in schools, Universities and shops. The problem the government has is that their advice has changed so much and the messaging is so confused now that reducing social distancing might reduce the whole structure to absolute ridicule. But how do we get back to anything like normal otherwise? 2 m unless both parties are wearing a mask, perhaps?
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
Good man.
Peter Hitchens goes one step further
"More than 1,000 protesters gathered outside a college of Oxford University on Tuesday, demanding the removal of a statue of 19th-century British colonialist Cecil Rhodes.
Organizers from the Rhodes Must Fall campaign group drew chalk crosses on both sides of the street as people gathered around the college's entrance, according to the BBC.
Protesters chanted, "Take it down" and held silence for 8 minutes, 46 seconds to honor George Floyd, which was the same length a white Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck before he died. Peter Hitchens, a prominent conservative columnist for Mail on Sunday, was among the very few in the crowd who did not take a knee.
Hundreds of people took a knee on Oxford High St for 8 mins 46 secs.
Everyone except Peter Hitchens 😒 #RhodesMustFall pic.twitter.com/qYulcpvXiZ
Speaking of which, I've noticed a lot lately how much of Monty Python and Fawlty Towers is basically humour based on other people's disabilities: mocking someone who stutters or who has a lisp (Life of Brian), a deaf woman (whole episode of Fawlty Towers), someone who can't speak good English (most of Fawlty Towers).
Funny in the 1970's. Crap in 2020.
Nope. The joke is on Basil Fawlty who is intolerant and has no understanding. Same as Alan Partridge or David Brent.
Basil IS the main joke, yes.
But many of the 'Basil dominating Manuel' scenes invite the viewer to laugh at what is essentially mental and physical abuse of a helpless migrant worker by his boss. Basil would be prosecuted for it these days and rightly so.
Still, it's net great imo. I just enjoy the genius bits and mentally tune out the scenes that make me feel complicit in a crime.
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
The Chancellor of Oxford University rightly doesn't need to give a damn about their attempts to police speech.
And wtf does it mean to pronounce a foreigner's name correctly? Do we have to mimic the accent of that country? By that standard, how many of us correctly pronounce Putin, Maduro or Qaddafi?
If I tried to pronounced Mandela's name as would his family and closest friends while otherwise pronouncing everything in my normal British accent, at the very least I'd come across a disrespectful, pretentious idiot.
Meanwhile, Chris Patten continues to take no shit:
'The chancellor of the University of Oxford has defended the statue of Cecil Rhodes at Oriel College, accusing the movement to topple it of hypocrisy, after hundreds of monuments across the country were targeted for removal.
Lord Patten of Barnes told Today on BBC Radio 4 that there was “a bit of hypocrisy” about “taking money for a hundred scholars a year, a fifth of whom are African, then saying we want to throw the statue wherever it is”.
The former Conservative Party chairman added: “If it’s good enough for Mandela it’s good enough for me”, referring to the involvement of the former South African president in setting up the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, a leadership development initiative.'
If there's anyone who can stay firm in a trench under unrelenting pressure, it's Patten.
The Chancellor of Oxford University rightly doesn't need to give a damn about their attempts to police speech.
And wtf does it mean to pronounce a foreigner's name correctly? Do we have to mimic the accent of that country? By that standard, how many of us correctly pronounce Putin, Maduro or Qaddafi?
If I tried to pronounced Mandela's name as would his family and closest friends while otherwise pronouncing everything in my normal British accent, at the very least I'd come across a disrespectful, pretentious idiot.
I remember the newscaster on Not the Nine o'clock News who used to find ever more extreme pronunciations to take the piss out of the BBC at the time. She was very funny but no doubt this would be disrespectful or something.
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
"Frankly my dear, I don't give a d*mn"
Would you advocate putting up re-runs of "Love Thy Neighbour" because it displays the race humour prevalent in the 1970s and therefore should stand as representative of its time? What about Alf Garnet who was considered by many to be beyond the pale when it was broadcast in the 60s and 70s?
Sometimes things outlive their era. Besides, Hollywood will remake it, they always do.
I've constantly seen "Love thy neighbour" referenced in these sorts of discussions so I thought I'd watch the pilot on youtube. The show, so far as I can tell has Eddie as the main character we're laughing at with his stuck in his ways racist attitude toward his new Tory neighbour Bill.......
And?
Trust me, there are episodes of that show that, if broadcast today, would result in writs being issued.
People have been banned on here for using the "N" word - what about a show that constantly uses it?
Blazing Saddles was a movie about the triumph of BLM against outright bigotry, but I doubt it will be getting rebroadcast any time soon.
Which is a pity because it's a wonderful film that parodies the stupidity of racism rather than its wickedness.
Coming back to Death Do Us Part, I don't think it was actually that good. The early episodes were the best, but these were the ones in which the ambivalence of the Alf character was nicely protrayed. Speight broadened the parody later as he became aware than Alf was becoming something of a hero in some quarters. Art lost out to political correctness as a consequence.
As for Othello, maybe it's time for a production emphasisng how the hero was perhaps just a bit too sensitive?
The best version I have ever seen of Othello had Iago played by a black actor. Can't remember his name but he was fantastic in the role
I was lucky enough to see Sir Laurence Olivier paly the part, but that was back in the days when 'blacking up' was controversial.
Off Topic and Spoiler Alert.
Playing the QI game with the family last night, one of the true or false questions that came up was 'Did the Metropolitan Police have their own Black and White Minstrel troupe for some thirty years?'
The answer was yes, talk about institutionalised racism!
The real crime was the show itself - dire!
Yes it was unwatchable irrespective of facial colour.
This argument about schools and whose fault it is they aren't back - listen to the PM when he breathlessly bangs the dispatch box. 2m distancing is here to stay. And 2m spacing Means Schools Cant Go Back. Not because of teachers. Because there isnt physical space in schools to bring all students back and have 2m spacing.
Why are the teachers saying it's unsafe? Because 2m spacing requirements of the government say it's unsafe...
I cannot understand why the WHO insist one metre spacing is safe
We're sticking with 2m. And that means it is unsafe according to the government's own guidance to schools for them to reopen. The very best we can hope for is 2 days a week from September. My eldest son has also now dropped the idea of university in September. It's pretty clear now that students are going to be as stuffed by 2m spacing as school pupils.
My recollection was that there was some German research which showed for those sitting beside each other 1m was a safe distance, for those walking with each other 1.4m and for runners something like 10m, all based on the likely reach of any plume of virus. It always comes to mind when joggers pass me on my walks. Clearly someone coughing or sneezing may need more than 1m (or a mask). I am just not aware of any research that backs the 2m gap and yet it is a major source of our challenges in schools, Universities and shops. The problem the government has is that their advice has changed so much and the messaging is so confused now that reducing social distancing might reduce the whole structure to absolute ridicule. But how do we get back to anything like normal otherwise? 2 m unless both parties are wearing a mask, perhaps?
I quickly worked out that rather than any particular distance, 2 seconds is broadly what the cycling/running distances correspond to.
Speaking of which, I've noticed a lot lately how much of Monty Python and Fawlty Towers is basically humour based on other people's disabilities: mocking someone who stutters or who has a lisp (Life of Brian), a deaf woman (whole episode of Fawlty Towers), someone who can't speak good English (most of Fawlty Towers).
Funny in the 1970's. Crap in 2020.
Quite a lot of humour is so peculiar to its time and place, that it ceases to be funny when you rewatch it.
That’s a mild comment but good on Hugh Laurie for saying that.
It won’t go unpunished, so takes some guts.
seconded. would be easier to say nothing. Rowan Atkinson was good speaking out on the censorship of comedy a few years back. Could do with his voice of reason again now.
Speaking of which, I've noticed a lot lately how much of Monty Python and Fawlty Towers is basically humour based on other people's disabilities: mocking someone who stutters or who has a lisp (Life of Brian), a deaf woman (whole episode of Fawlty Towers), someone who can't speak good English (most of Fawlty Towers).
Funny in the 1970's. Crap in 2020.
Nope. The joke is on Basil Fawlty who is intolerant and has no understanding. Same as Alan Partridge or David Brent.
Basil IS the main joke, yes.
But many of the 'Basil dominating Manuel' scenes invite the viewer to laugh at what is essentially mental and physical abuse of a helpless migrant worker by his boss. Basil would be prosecuted for it these days and rightly so.
Still, it's net great imo. I just enjoy the genius bits and mentally tune out the scenes that make me feel complicit in a crime.
I tend to watch episodes for 10-15 minutes laughing out loud and then feel a pressing need to leave the room. Its just too uncomfortable.
This is what I suspected. His party and the far left MPs will drag him down and stop him getting into power. They might be backbenchers now rather than shadow ministers but thanks to social media they have a louder voice than ever and they will continue to scare the moderate horses into the arms of Boris or Sunak.
Black Lives Matter are radical Marxists to the left of Corbyn, and it looks like they've got Boring Keir Starmer on a string
By chance am reading the very Flashman novel in which Flashy is embroiled with the slave trade and the underground railroad: Flash for Freedom. Highly recommended. Although a comic novel it very well portrays the sheer horror of the Middle Passage. George MacDonald Fraser was a meticulous researcher of the historical background to his books.
I can well understand the rage of people, particularly those who feel discriminated against, at monuments which appear to condone the slave trade. And I have a sympathy with the demand that certain statues which commemorate individuals whose main distinction is their association with slavery should go.
The danger is that this is used as a lever to open up a culture war which extends well beyond that demand. The fact is that anyone from the past when casual racism was the norm could be deemed offensive by those with an axe to grind. Nelson springs to mind. Topple him from his column?
We should resist efforts to rip up the historic fabric of our country and judge individuals who lived in such profoundly different times. Even the 1970s were extraordinarily different from today, never mind the 1870s or the 1770s. Fact is the UK has tended to be ahead of the curve in terms of shaking off the dark oppressions of the past and that is something to be celebrated and not trashed.
To be honest I am not sure how much longer the party will support Boris
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
"Frankly my dear, I don't give a d*mn"
Would you advocate putting up re-runs of "Love Thy Neighbour" because it displays the race humour prevalent in the 1970s and therefore should stand as representative of its time? What about Alf Garnet who was considered by many to be beyond the pale when it was broadcast in the 60s and 70s?
Sometimes things outlive their era. Besides, Hollywood will remake it, they always do.
I've constantly seen "Love thy neighbour" referenced in these sorts of discussions so I thought I'd watch the pilot on youtube. The show, so far as I can tell has Eddie as the main character we're laughing at with his stuck in his ways racist attitude toward his new Tory neighbour Bill.......
And?
Trust me, there are episodes of that show that, if broadcast today, would result in writs being issued.
People have been banned on here for using the "N" word - what about a show that constantly uses it?
Blazing Saddles was a movie about the triumph of BLM against outright bigotry, but I doubt it will be getting rebroadcast any time soon.
Which is a pity because it's a wonderful film that parodies the stupidity of racism rather than its wickedness.
Coming back to Death Do Us Part, I don't think it was actually that good. The early episodes were the best, but these were the ones in which the ambivalence of the Alf character was nicely protrayed. Speight broadened the parody later as he became aware than Alf was becoming something of a hero in some quarters. Art lost out to political correctness as a consequence.
As for Othello, maybe it's time for a production emphasisng how the hero was perhaps just a bit too sensitive?
The best version I have ever seen of Othello had Iago played by a black actor. Can't remember his name but he was fantastic in the role
I was lucky enough to see Sir Laurence Olivier paly the part, but that was back in the days when 'blacking up' was controversial.
Off Topic and Spoiler Alert.
Playing the QI game with the family last night, one of the true or false questions that came up was 'Did the Metropolitan Police have their own Black and White Minstrel troupe for some thirty years?'
The answer was yes, talk about institutionalised racism!
The real crime was the show itself - dire!
Yes it was unwatchable irrespective of facial colour.
My parents would bestir themselves to switch channel. I suspect they regarded it as multicultural propaganda.
This is what I suspected. His party and the far left MPs will drag him down and stop him getting into power. They might be backbenchers now rather than shadow ministers but thanks to social media they have a louder voice than ever and they will continue to scare the moderate horses into the arms of Boris or Sunak.
Very quick post: my wife has just come in furious about this - HBO have pulled Gone with the Wind.
They've said it: "glorifies the antebellum south" and (perpetuates) "painful stereotypes of people of colour", although they claim they will restore it at some point in the future with a warning. Let's see if they do.
The BBC article goes on to say that Disney are reviewing Dumbo. I'm not making this up:
This madness won't end. It's not just statues: it's music, art, films, show, words.. culture. Anything that might not sit well now with the professionally offended and the leading-edge norms of today, policed by an extremely nervous media politik.
Not really understanding the outrage. And you are genuinely outraged, I can feel it, it's not some sort of reverse virtue-signalling.
So I'm hoping to be allowed to probe.
Are you worried about "where we draw the line" or about the drawing of any line at all?
To help answer, I would ask you to consider that -
On The Buses is never repeated. Neither is Love Thy Neighbour. The name of the dog - "N*gg*r" - in the Battle Of Britain film is now edited out. We get no opportunity these days to enjoy the Black & White Minstrels. Jim Davison is effectively banned from primetime TV. The late great Bernard Manning has been relegated to YouTube. There are warnings published for LOADS of works from the past that contain outmoded racist stereoptyes.
Are you unhappy with all the above and wish to see it reversed?
Or do you think this process of revisionism should simply STOP - right here and right NOW - because iyo the line has been drawn in exactly the right place?
Just for accuracy the dog was from The Dambusters not BoB. :-)
You are absolutely right.
My whole post duly demolished -
No no, I wasn't disagreeing necessarily with what you posted. Just enjoying a pedantic moment.
By chance am reading the very Flashman novel in which Flashy is embroiled with the slave trade and the underground railroad: Flash for Freedom. Highly recommended. Although a comic novel it very well portrays the sheer horror of the Middle Passage. George MacDonald Fraser was a meticulous researcher of the historical background to his books.
I can well understand the rage of people, particularly those who feel discriminated against, at monuments which appear to condone the slave trade. And I have a sympathy with the demand that certain statues which commemorate individuals whose main distinction is their association with slavery should go.
The danger is that this is used as a lever to open up a culture war which extends well beyond that demand. The fact is that anyone from the past when casual racism was the norm could be deemed offensive by those with an axe to grind. Nelson springs to mind. Topple him from his column?
We should resist efforts to rip up the historic fabric of our country and judge individuals who lived in such profoundly different times. Even the 1970s were extraordinarily different from today, never mind the 1870s or the 1770s. Fact is the UK has tended to be ahead of the curve in terms of shaking off the dark oppressions of the past and that is something to be celebrated and not trashed.
Parts of Flash for Freedom are genuinely horrific. I think it's the most disturbing book in the whole series (which, given the subject matter, it ought to be).
To be honest I am not sure how much longer the party will support Boris
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
The moment when you're in the trenches and the enemy is advancing is not the time to shoot your officers in the back.
This argument about schools and whose fault it is they aren't back - listen to the PM when he breathlessly bangs the dispatch box. 2m distancing is here to stay. And 2m spacing Means Schools Cant Go Back. Not because of teachers. Because there isnt physical space in schools to bring all students back and have 2m spacing.
Why are the teachers saying it's unsafe? Because 2m spacing requirements of the government say it's unsafe...
I wouldn't get "teachers" mixed up with "teachers' Unions. 2 very different things.
Incidentally for those complaining about ulterior motives of BLM please stop and pause for a second and think about Rotherham.
In Rotherham because of who was raising concerns and their perceived ulterior motives, the legitimate concerns about grooming and rape were ignored for years leading to avoidable harm to many victims of it.
Do you support what happened in Rotherham?
If not, pause for a second and think are you sure you want to repeat the same with BLM. If BLM have both legitimate grievances and ulterior motives (allegedly) or the people behind it do, the solution is not to ignore them and wish it all away. The solution is not to worry about a slippery slope and "where does it stop".
The solution has to be to deal with the legitimate grievances, while fighting any illegitimate ones. That may be harder to do, but its the right thing to do.
We can agree that the slave trade is something to be ashamed of, and be happy to see statues pulled down without having to ignore the fact the current protests are on behalf of the extreme left and are also a great way of pushing the rest of their communist agenda. Their agenda isn't even necessarily bad, people are attracted to Marxism, it is taught in our Universities.
The extreme left may be involved in the current protests, but then the extreme left loves to join in to protests in general. That's not what the protests are about though, ignore them just like Brexit isn't about the extreme right however much Mr Meeks likes to insinuate it is.
When I was a student I marched against Top Up Fees in London when there was talk about Blair increasing the fees from the £1000 I was paying to potentially up to £10,000 and was disappointed to so many joining in the march waving irrelevant placards like Palestine or Socialist Workers etc - they were jumping on the bandwagon but I wasn't protesting for socialism or against Palestine.
As far as I can tell, the Black Lives Movement advocates a mix of reasonable and unreasonable policies.. It's not just a case of finding that unsavoury elements latch on to a reasonable cause, like opposition to tuitions fees.
In which case agree to the reasonable ones as swiftly as possible then move on.
Once you take away the legs of the reasonable policies all you're left with is demanding the unreasonable ones.
To be honest I am not sure how much longer the party will support Boris
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
There won;t be a challenge yet.
His rivals are going to let him own the coming economic carnage.
To be honest I am not sure how much longer the party will support Boris
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
The moment when you're in the trenches and the enemy is advancing is not the time to shoot your officers in the back.
I would not shoot anyone in the back, front or at all
However, Boris is failing in health and has made a huge error of judgment
Further to the comments about the suitability or not of various TV programmes to be screened now...
I'm re-reading the first Flashman book - I read a few of them years ago and saw some mention of them recently (might have been on here, can't remember) - so thought I'd read them again.
Now I'm left of centre but not especially 'woke', or a prude or easily offended by any stretch of the imagination, but the casual, repeated use of the n-word in the book is making me uncomfortable and is spoiling the book for me, to be honest.
Yes, I know that it is written in the voice of a Victorian bloke, and in real life people of that time very probably used the word without a second thought. I fully appreciate the past had different mores and attitudes. Flashman, as a novel, might well be satirising those attitudes. But even though I know all that, whenever my eyes skin across the n-word it is jarring with me, even if the language is aiming for historical authenticity.
I don't know whether I would have felt so put out by its use a few weeks ago, or whether the current situation is acting as a catalyst.
The book was first published in 1969 - before my time but am I right in thinking that even at that point it was becoming unacceptable in general usage?
To be honest I am not sure how much longer the party will support Boris
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
The moment when you're in the trenches and the enemy is advancing is not the time to shoot your officers in the back.
I would not shoot anyone in the back, front or at all
However, Boris is failing in health and has made a huge error of judgment
Cummings is his poll tax moment
I think his poll tax moment will be measured by exactly two metres.
Speaking of which, I've noticed a lot lately how much of Monty Python and Fawlty Towers is basically humour based on other people's disabilities: mocking someone who stutters or who has a lisp (Life of Brian), a deaf woman (whole episode of Fawlty Towers), someone who can't speak good English (most of Fawlty Towers).
Funny in the 1970's. Crap in 2020.
Life of Brian rips the piss out of religion for 90 minutes and yet you have found some minor offence other than that that most people will have forgotten. I expect that 99% of people who have seen the film would not have pointed to that as the offensive/controversial bit.
Further to the comments about the suitability or not of various TV programmes to be screened now...
I'm re-reading the first Flashman book - I read a few of them years ago and saw some mention of them recently (might have been on here, can't remember) - so thought I'd read them again.
Now I'm left of centre but not especially 'woke', or a prude or easily offended by any stretch of the imagination, but the casual, repeated use of the n-word in the book is making me uncomfortable and is spoiling the book for me, to be honest.
Yes, I know that it is written in the voice of a Victorian bloke, and in real life people of that time very probably used the word without a second thought. I fully appreciate the past had different mores and attitudes. Flashman, as a novel, might well be satirising those attitudes. But even though I know all that, whenever my eyes skin across the n-word it is jarring with me, even if the language is aiming for historical authenticity.
I don't know whether I would have felt so put out by its use a few weeks ago, or whether the current situation is acting as a catalyst.
The book was first published in 1969 - before my time but am I right in thinking that even at that point it was becoming unacceptable in general usage?
A friend of mine cannot read Dorothy L. Sayers’ Unnatural Death and Whose Body? for the same reason.
To be honest I am not sure how much longer the party will support Boris
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
The moment when you're in the trenches and the enemy is advancing is not the time to shoot your officers in the back.
To be honest I am not sure how much longer the party will support Boris
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
The moment when you're in the trenches and the enemy is advancing is not the time to shoot your officers in the back.
What a really peculiar view to take.
Then I'm glad we're never likely to have to share a trench
Statues. There are far too many of them cluttering up the place. Most are of little historical or artistic value. They were simply a late Victorian/Edwardian fashion. There is a huge one in my local market town sitting in the middle of the main junction. Causing traffic to pile up down the main street. If it weren't there a roundabout or extra lane for turning would be available. Many statues are simply there because they are there and have been for living memory.
We could always replace PMQs with this since it does not matter what they say...
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
do {
printf("PB Tory: Boris was brilliant. Starmer was sh*t\n");
printf("PB nonTory: Boris was sh*t. Starmer was brilliant\n");
} while ( borisIsPM );
return 0;
}
Very inefficient code there, could have done it with one print statement.
To be honest I am not sure how much longer the party will support Boris
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
The moment when you're in the trenches and the enemy is advancing is not the time to shoot your officers in the back.
What a really peculiar view to take.
Wrong as well. As @Dura_Ace will surely point out, much the best time to shoot the officers is when the enemy can be plausibly blamed for it.
Further to the comments about the suitability or not of various TV programmes to be screened now...
I'm re-reading the first Flashman book - I read a few of them years ago and saw some mention of them recently (might have been on here, can't remember) - so thought I'd read them again.
Now I'm left of centre but not especially 'woke', or a prude or easily offended by any stretch of the imagination, but the casual, repeated use of the n-word in the book is making me uncomfortable and is spoiling the book for me, to be honest.
Yes, I know that it is written in the voice of a Victorian bloke, and in real life people of that time very probably used the word without a second thought. I fully appreciate the past had different mores and attitudes. Flashman, as a novel, might well be satirising those attitudes. But even though I know all that, whenever my eyes skin across the n-word it is jarring with me, even if the language is aiming for historical authenticity.
I don't know whether I would have felt so put out by its use a few weeks ago, or whether the current situation is acting as a catalyst.
The book was first published in 1969 - before my time but am I right in thinking that even at that point it was becoming unacceptable in general usage?
Yes, it was. Flashman is a villain protagonist, who tends to share the beliefs of the most racist of his contemporaries, tempered by honesty as a diarist, and respect for the people of colour he meets on the battlefield.
Most readers find him an entertaining villain protagonist.
If even a person as reprehensible as Flashman finds the slave trade horrifying, you see how shockingly bad it is.
Speaking of which, I've noticed a lot lately how much of Monty Python and Fawlty Towers is basically humour based on other people's disabilities: mocking someone who stutters or who has a lisp (Life of Brian), a deaf woman (whole episode of Fawlty Towers), someone who can't speak good English (most of Fawlty Towers).
Funny in the 1970's. Crap in 2020.
Life of Brian rips the piss out of religion for 90 minutes and yet you have found some minor offence other than that that most people will have forgotten. I expect that 99% of people who have seen the film would not have pointed to that as the offensive/controversial bit.
To be honest I am not sure how much longer the party will support Boris
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
The moment when you're in the trenches and the enemy is advancing is not the time to shoot your officers in the back.
Comments
5. Is a criminal offence.
Best of luck.
As far as I can tell, the Black Lives Movement advocates a mix of reasonable and unreasonable policies.. It's not just a case of finding that unsavoury elements latch on to a reasonable cause, like opposition to tuitions fees.
My posts today have been about a series of shows either being pulled for good, or temporarily with a promise they'll come back with a warning. I don't see why Little Britain should fall into the former category, or Dumbo the latter, and I expect more and more of this in the days and weeks to come.
The way you've phrased it is slightly out-of-date. I'd draw a distinction between a live broadcast to everyone and available on streaming by personal selection, which I view on drawing from a library.
(1) Dambusters - warning at start. Live broadcast and streaming ok. It's a very important film and part of our cultural heritage.
(2) Love Thy Neighbour - very strong warning at start. Possibly some edits. Streaming ok with consent box. I also watched it after reading on here how awful it was: it satires the openly racist views held at the time.
(3) Jim Davidson - warning. Streaming ok.
(4) Bernard Manning - youtube only.
I haven't heard of On The Buses.
Now, let me ask you: are you ok with Men Behaving Badly, I'm Alan Partridge, League of Gentlemen, The Office, Snow White, Fantasia and Alice in Wonderland staying up too?
Because I can guarantee you some will find something to offend in those too.
My whole post duly demolished -
if so, difficult to see how his brother doesn’t qualify given they were equally prominent and had similar views.
In fact, there's a fair bit in Fawlty Towers that really isn't funny any longer. Beating up a 'dago twat' as he is called by Cleese is just not acceptable.
https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/1270655789036961793
But we have you back in "it's wrong cos I think it's wrong" territory, which I sense is the best we can hope for.
What have you done other than retweet nonsense?
Funny in the 1970's. Crap in 2020.
At least his friend Michael Portillo has moved with the times. His Empire Journeys series on Channel 5 is superb and should be mandatory viewing for every British citizen.
Right ... to write.
Playing the QI game with the family last night, one of the true or false questions that came up was 'Did the Metropolitan Police have their own Black and White Minstrel troupe for some thirty years?'
The answer was yes, talk about institutionalised racism!
1. Johnson believing the government threw its arms aroundt he country and could not have tackled the coronavirus crisis any better is not going to play well.
2. It's really not a good idea for Johnson to allow himself tpo be painted as Trump's poodle - even if he is.
3. There will be a u-turn on funding free meals for the most vulnerable children in England.
For today’s audiences that’s why you carry the warnings.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1270682450574880768
If I tried to pronounced Mandela's name as would his family and closest friends while otherwise pronouncing everything in my normal British accent, at the very least I'd come across a disrespectful, pretentious idiot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jkxm5UTe-Xg
"More than 1,000 protesters gathered outside a college of Oxford University on Tuesday, demanding the removal of a statue of 19th-century British colonialist Cecil Rhodes.
Organizers from the Rhodes Must Fall campaign group drew chalk crosses on both sides of the street as people gathered around the college's entrance, according to the BBC.
Protesters chanted, "Take it down" and held silence for 8 minutes, 46 seconds to honor George Floyd, which was the same length a white Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck before he died. Peter Hitchens, a prominent conservative columnist for Mail on Sunday, was among the very few in the crowd who did not take a knee.
Hundreds of people took a knee on Oxford High St for 8 mins 46 secs.
Everyone except Peter Hitchens 😒 #RhodesMustFall pic.twitter.com/qYulcpvXiZ
— Rabyah Khan (@Rabyah_Khan) June 9, 2020"
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/oxford-protesters-demand-removal-of-british-colonialist-cecil-rhodes
So why the contradiction
And no need to be rude
Clearly someone coughing or sneezing may need more than 1m (or a mask). I am just not aware of any research that backs the 2m gap and yet it is a major source of our challenges in schools, Universities and shops.
The problem the government has is that their advice has changed so much and the messaging is so confused now that reducing social distancing might reduce the whole structure to absolute ridicule. But how do we get back to anything like normal otherwise? 2 m unless both parties are wearing a mask, perhaps?
It won’t go unpunished, so takes some guts.
A long standing campaign, organised by the usual leftie race baiters.
In the last local voxpop, its retention was overwhelmingly positive.
But many of the 'Basil dominating Manuel' scenes invite the viewer to laugh at what is essentially mental and physical abuse of a helpless migrant worker by his boss. Basil would be prosecuted for it these days and rightly so.
Still, it's net great imo. I just enjoy the genius bits and mentally tune out the scenes that make me feel complicit in a crime.
It's not the accent.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1270374388488167428?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
I can well understand the rage of people, particularly those who feel discriminated against, at monuments which appear to condone the slave trade. And I have a sympathy with the demand that certain statues which commemorate individuals whose main distinction is their association with slavery should go.
The danger is that this is used as a lever to open up a culture war which extends well beyond that demand. The fact is that anyone from the past when casual racism was the norm could be deemed offensive by those with an axe to grind. Nelson springs to mind. Topple him from his column?
We should resist efforts to rip up the historic fabric of our country and judge individuals who lived in such profoundly different times. Even the 1970s were extraordinarily different from today, never mind the 1870s or the 1770s. Fact is the UK has tended to be ahead of the curve in terms of shaking off the dark oppressions of the past and that is something to be celebrated and not trashed.
He is obviously unwell, made a dreadful error of judgment over Cummings, and his approval ratings are tanking
It has been said on here many times how ruthless the conservative party are with their leaders, and I expect some may, even now, be penning letters to Graham Brady
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1270682453213143040
Once you take away the legs of the reasonable policies all you're left with is demanding the unreasonable ones.
His rivals are going to let him own the coming economic carnage.
However, Boris is failing in health and has made a huge error of judgment
Cummings is his poll tax moment
I'm re-reading the first Flashman book - I read a few of them years ago and saw some mention of them recently (might have been on here, can't remember) - so thought I'd read them again.
Now I'm left of centre but not especially 'woke', or a prude or easily offended by any stretch of the imagination, but the casual, repeated use of the n-word in the book is making me uncomfortable and is spoiling the book for me, to be honest.
Yes, I know that it is written in the voice of a Victorian bloke, and in real life people of that time very probably used the word without a second thought. I fully appreciate the past had different mores and attitudes. Flashman, as a novel, might well be satirising those attitudes. But even though I know all that, whenever my eyes skin across the n-word it is jarring with me, even if the language is aiming for historical authenticity.
I don't know whether I would have felt so put out by its use a few weeks ago, or whether the current situation is acting as a catalyst.
The book was first published in 1969 - before my time but am I right in thinking that even at that point it was becoming unacceptable in general usage?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=14&v=L9bMWe3t-t4&feature=emb_logo
https://twitter.com/adam_ldr/status/1270685623259664389
(sorry about the formatting. PB is not a coder's forum)
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
do {
printf("PB Tory: Boris was brilliant. Starmer was sh*t\n");
printf("PB nonTory: Boris was sh*t. Starmer was brilliant\n");
} while ( borisIsPM );
return 0;
}
There is a huge one in my local market town sitting in the middle of the main junction. Causing traffic to pile up down the main street.
If it weren't there a roundabout or extra lane for turning would be available.
Many statues are simply there because they are there and have been for living memory.
‘My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!’
Alien: Covenant!
Most readers find him an entertaining villain protagonist.
If even a person as reprehensible as Flashman finds the slave trade horrifying, you see how shockingly bad it is.