An audience with
I attended my first ever stadium comedy gig on Friday night. Alright, arena comedy gig. The O2, which is inside the Millennium Dome, apparently holds 14,000 people (I had read 20,000 but maybe that's for music gigs - either way, it's a lot bigger than Wembley Arena, the nearest London benchmark). On Friday, Richard Herring and I were two of those 14,000 people at this comic version of a Nuremberg rally, there to display our collective solidarity towards Al Murray The Pub Landlord - not to be confused with Al Murray, whom Richard has known since he had wavy hair. I saw Al Murray supporting Harry Hill many years ago at the Queen Elizabeth Hall, when he used to come out and make the sound effects of various weapons using his mouth, which was a pretty neat act in itself. I first saw Al Murray The Pub Landlord supporting Harry Hill too, at a London Theatre, since which the character has grown and grown and in many ways taken on a life of its own. The bits I have seen of this act over the years on stage and on telly confirm that Al Murray is a skilled performer, good on his feet and the proud owner of one of those characters who catches on a big, mainstream, ITV1 kind of way. That few people bothered to watch Al Murray's recent sketch show just proves how inseparable he has become from the character of Al Murray The Pub Landlord.Richard and I travelled East on public transport. Richard had his Hitler moustache on. I observed other travellers and very few seemed even to notice that they had a potential beerhall agitator in their midst. There was something quite apt about being with a man pretending to be one of the most right wing people in 20th Century history as we travelled towards a convention of either right wing people, or non-right-wing people who think a left wing man pretending to be right wing is funny. It would be offensive to suggest that the right wing people in the audience are stupid, and that they actually think the things Al Murray The Pub Landlord says about national identity and sexual politics and foreigners are the things that Al Murray thinks. I'm sure pretty much everybody knows he is a fictional character. He is a pub landlord with his own chat show on ITV1, for a start, which is clearly a fictional conceit. But that doesn't mean that the non-stupid right-wing people don't agree with many things the fictional Pub Landlord says. This makes for a very interesting night of comedy. (OK, let's go mad and imagine that there are people not clever enough to know that Al Murray The Pub Landlord is a fictional character: we must never tell them the truth and ruin their lives.)
On reaching our seats in Block A1, Richard and I quickly found ourselves playing along with the conceit of the live show, waving our little supplied Union Jacks in unison with the 13,998 other people in the O2. (Mine broke, I was waving it so hard.) Part of the appeal of a massive stand-up gig is the unity of a large audience, the reassuring knowledge that thousands of other people are laughing at the same joke as you. Listen! That's the sound of your laugh, multiplied thousands of times, resounding round a big barn! Al Murray is very good at insulting people on the front row of his gigs while keeping them onside - this, of course, being a pact between performer and fan: I will mock you in front of thousands of other people and your embarrassed face will be projected onto giant screens so that even people at the back can see it and laugh at it, but it will be done for comedic effect; it's nothing personal. The first half of the two-hour show (no support act) comprised mostly Al Murray The Pub Landlord gathering information on about a dozen paying customers, and skilfully linking this information together, while storing it for later callbacks. It's not a new trick in comedy, but done well, it is hugely satisfying.
The second half had more content in it, more written material, and this became slightly boring after a while, unless I was just tired. The long mime about a man bringing a lady to orgasm using his hand was very clever, and quite daring. However, the long section during which Al Murray The Pub Landlord showed photos of famous people he considered "lucky" (including Greg Rusedski, who was sitting in the row behind us and clearly enjoyed the joke*) dragged a bit, and when he just showed pictures of himself posing with guests from his ITV1 chat show, the fiction of the show and the character were stretched to breaking point. The encore, which was a singalong and involved an embarrassed conga line, was quite poor, I thought. But having watched one man hold the crowd for two hours, it seemed churlish to criticise. Aside from some beer pumps, a prop gun that was used to fire crisps once and the screen with the photos on, Al Murray had entertained 14,000 people using just his voice and his physical presence. This is not to be sniffed at.
There was one uncomfortable moment for woolly liberals, when, as part of a longer routine, Al Murray The Pub Landlord impersonated an Indian person at the other end of the line in a call-centre: this got a massive cheer from the audience. Some of them were cheering Al Murray The Pub Landlord for cleverly observing that some call centres are in India, and some of them were cheering Al Murray The Pub Landlord for insinuating that being Indian was either inherently funny or inherently bad. Because the brief impersonation of an Indian was not commented upon, or contextualised, or turned on its head to make comedy from our preconceptions, it just acted as a Pavlovian cue for recognition laughter, and recognition cheering. The man dressed as Hitler next to me did not cheer, and nor did I. There was actually nothing to cheer, when you thought about it, which I did, and some people did not.
I was glad to have seen this concert for free, as a guest of Avalon, as I don't think I would have chosen to go and see Al Murray The Pub Landlord, and I would be one experience poorer. I was also glad to see the inside of the O2 for free, as I have been resisting its ubiquitous charms. It is actually a really well-run, well-staffed venue, with excellent digital sound (the critic Ben Thompson explained it to me during the interval), and it's a piece of cake to get to by rail. On the Tube carriage we were on, there was a group of young men who were almost literally communicating with each other using grunts and noises. We agreed it would have been funny if they had confounded our lazy preconceptions and not got off at the O2 tube stop. But they did get off there, and carried on making noises at each other. Beautiful people, beautiful British people.
It was fun to be stewarded up in lifts and along secret corridors to the VIP bar before and after, where I was pleased to bump into Harry Hill (or Matt, as I know him - I have known him since he had hair), Ben Miller, Danielle Ward, Robert Ross the tireless chronicler of old British comedy (currently working on a Sid James biography) and Giles Coren, who did not call me or anybody else a "cunt" and impressed me by using his restaurant critic instincts and sensing lamb-based canapes at 100 paces. (Richard introduced me to Marc Bannerman, too, which was very exciting as I used to really like him on EastEnders, even though he left the programme just as I was starting to write for it.)
* Jon Culshaw was in the row in front of us, and Jim Rosenthal the sports presenter in the row behind us. It was like an audience with Al Murray The Pub Landlord.
posted by Andrew Collins @ 4:04 PM
45 Comments
Contact
Andrew at
45 Comments:
I've been uncomfortable with Al Murray's act since I realised that it's essentially a very posh, privately educated man making a joke out of pretending to be an ignorant, working class man.
And 'Time Gentlemen Please' is the only thing of Richard's that I cannot find a place in my heart for. Awful.
Andrew, have you realised that by hanging around with a Hitler lookalike you can get deeper under the skin of Unity Mitford? Just a thought.
People clearly aren't stupid enough not to realise that the pub landlord is a fictional character, and the act may be, as you say, a satire on right wing views. But it's never been very clear, to me at least, that this is the case.
Whenever I've been exposed to the pub landlord, all I've seen is a right wing comedian who plays a comedy right-winger, filling a niche by playing in the grey area where he can quickly step back and say 'it's just a character' if someone accuses him of being a bit too Jim Davidson.
Do I believe he really thinks all women are either secretaries or nurses, who only drink white wine? Of course not, but I think he's happy to make jokes on that basis. Do I think he really hates the French. Again no, but behind the exaggerations, is an apparent nationalism that does feel real, and is unpleasant to watch.
If you're telling me that the real Al Murray is left-wing, then I'm left assuming that he's willing to pretend not to be in order to pander to a right-wing nationalistic demographic, which just makes him a prostitute, doesn't it?
I was also at the gig, next to John Culshaw's missus. There was a massive man in front of me who looked liked a cross between Chris Moyles and 'The Lotto Lout' Mikey Carroll. He and his wife LOVED the Indian call centre thing. It made me squirm. As did a couple of the slightly more homophobic observations. Scarily these sorts of jokes got the biggest laughs. I felt like I was back in my hometown, sneaking the Guardian home in my backpack. Al Murray: victim of his own success?
i've always been a bit concerned about whether people were finding the ironic right wing stuff funny or if they were enjoying it because they actually agreed with it, so well done for bringing it up. i suppose it lies with the intentions of the comic, people interpreting it the wrong way cant really be helped and ultimately the joke is on them for not fully getting it.
matt
Sorry to post another YouTube link. In the weird five-hours-behind world that I currently inhabit, I never know what stuff has had coverage over here, so apologies if this is old hat. It's (mostly) a piece from MSNBC's Countdown about how Republicans can laugh at The Colbert Report while not seeing that it's taking the piss out of them. I'm not sure it actually explains how though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0VacVwpF2E
Leno regularly gets laughs simply from observing that the people providing unspecified "tech support" are always in India. That alone seems to constitute a piece of observational humour. I haven't seen Al Murray's show so I don't know whether his Indian accent was the "reveal" for that "observation" or whether it really was just a "funny" voice that people were laughing at. I am though increasingly uneasy about comedians getting laughs from essentially non-PC material on the basis that they're playing a character, or that we all know "they don't mean it". It's what the audience is actually laughing at that troubles me. On the other hand, if some youngster hears your podcast and doesn't get that there's only a limited context in which calling someone a bummer is funny, that's not your fault, is it? [I mean that, by the way; it's not meant confrontationally.]
I think the most damaging confusion comes from the fact that Al Murray and the Pub Landlord share the same name. If the Pub Landlord was called Ernie Racist, then I think we probably wouldn't be having this discussion at all. As it is, Al's always on thin conceptual ice.
I know it wasn't meant as a confrontation, Dave, but our podcast is clearly stamped EXPLICIT on iTunes, so if a "youngster" hears it, he or she will hear plenty of other adult material not intended for youngsters. I guess it's all about context, in the end. Someone just emailed me and politely informed me that he had unsubscribed from our podcast because of Richard's flight of surreal fancy in which he played with the idea of children being the excrement of sexual intercourse. This was, apparently, too much for one listener - who I suspect is a parent, and thus hugely sensitive about material based on children.
This is why the Maddy material upsets some listeners. The irony to me is that Richard and I were riffing on the notion sold by the media that someone who dies but has kids is somehow more tragic than someone who dies without kids. There's no point in entering into a dialogue with the ex-subscriber. He has made up his mind, based on his own reaction to a "routine" (not a routine in the Al Murray sense, as we are literally making it up, live, as we go along, so some stuff comes out that you might edit from a written routine). If the context needs explaining, perhaps there is a problem.
Nobody has ever explained the concept of Al Murray The Pub Landlord, he has just risen to prominence gradually. Far fewer saw Time Gentlemen Please, where he was in fictional context, than see the chat show, where he is not.
I really dont get the pub landlord character at all, I just find him irritating.
I dont mind the xeonophobia etc if its amusing, but its so tediously predictable. That said, a lot of amusing people quite like him, so maybe its just me.
On a more positive note, I just watched the inbetweeners on 4OD catch-up at the weekend for the first time. I was very surprised at how excelent this was. great scripts and the two main actors have excellent comedy timing. really enjoyable show.
I saw this act years ago and it was clear even then that Al Murray was attracting a sizable group of people who were not there for the irony. He seemed to be doing nothing to discourage that (and of course he could argue that his responsibility to his audience ends with having entertained them; you can lead a knuckle-head to irony, but....).
It's 'Alf Garnett Syndrome' all over again, really. But I would hope that Al Murray might have registered a slight internal shudder on hearing a 'comedy Indian accent' so roundly cheered. Shame on him for that.
What's interesting about that person unsubscribing about the baby made of shit is that presumably they have been listening for a while and heard all sorts of offensive stuff and not felt the need to unsubscribe either because they understood it was a joke or maybe thought it was all right. Then they hear one thing that affects them and they get offended. That says more about them than about us. They were happy to let a lot of worse things go and then get upset by something that is at best surreal. Where were they when I said I hated all pakistanis or that I thought Andrew's mum was that thing I said? It shows them up to be morally ambiguous at best. Either you get that it's a joke or it's not, but to get offended by one issue and not the others is ridiculous. Maybe they had a baby that was made of shit and it died or something.
I am sure there are people who enjoy our podcast on a non-ironic level. I don't think it's our job to take account of them, because most people get where we're coming from (or don't and thus unsubscribe). Nor is it Al's. I don't think you can judge whether an audience is understanding the irony or not or joining in with the joke. But in that rubbish Indian call centre joke (mainly rubbish because it is hack and not even true) there seems to be no irony in the joke and some genuine nastiness in the response and if I was Al I would want to think about that.
This live show for me showed the point where it's changed from being a genuine subversive and interesting satire of both the right and the left wing (the character danced a clever line in the past where it should have made people of both sides of the spectrum to question what they believed and why) into a more mainstream act which still has a shadow of that old satirical bite, but then with all the showbiz pics and the conga line showed that there is now as much an interest in becoming a showbiz celeb.
I still think it's an amazing journey and there's some brilliant stuff in there, but undoubtedly it had changed to some extent.
It's irrelevant what Al's background is. I think it's as bad to judge someone by their upbringing as it is by the colour of their skin. People who go to public school don't really have a choice in that. It's a kind of chip on the shoulder prejudice that I have myself been victim to (even though I didn't go to public school). To make a sweeping judgement about people based on their background is wrong whatever that background is. I think it's interesting that it is possible to dismiss someone because of an education that they really had no say in. I have even seen people who did go to public school doing it. It's interesting at best.
Oh and Time Gentlemen Please is really good. You should give it another go.
The whole 'Al Murray' act has never been explained. I don't think I've ever read anything about him where he isn't in Pub Landlord character. He also insists on actually writing features for magazines when a new series comes on himself, so interviewing him about the whole persona thing is out of the question.
That said, I've met him and he's a really nice man. I too was invited to the O2 thing but I'm not a fan of his comedy and so didn't fancy it.
I don't see anyone publicly pulling him up on his act and getting him to explain himself, so it'll continue in similar vein forever, probably.
I'd like to second the suggestion to revisit TGP. I didn't have Sky when it was first broadcast, and only caught one or two episodes on later repeats, which I tended to find underwhelming to say the least.
However, I bought the DVD box set a month or so ago. Watching from episode 1 onwards, I really enjoyed it, and there was much more depth and subtlety to the characters than I expected. Definitely well worth the discount price I paid on Amazon.
I don't think Al's background is at all relevent to his act, as his act is exactly that - an ACT. However, Al the Man does, to some extent have to take responsibility for the response he elicits from his audience, even if he is performing as Al the Act. The call centre thing highlighted that perfectly. He should have known better. I know I'm arguing mostly with people who agree with me, but I still wanted to say that.
I've not seen Al's Pub Landlord for a while, but saw it in its early days, watched TGP, and have seen his live show in London a few times in the early 2000s. I really enjoyed most of his act, and as people here have said his strong point is usually his interaction with the audience. It was always clear in his live shows that he was a history buff, and he'd frequently break character (or at least break the 'believability' of the character) to correct the stuff he was spouting.
As I remember the formula was generally to spout bigoted opinions which either:
a) were absurd and would take an imbecile to enjoy it on an unironic level (like much of RKH's more 'offensive' stuff). The best example I can remember of this was his great routine taking the mick out of the German accent which evolved into him prancing around on stage making dinosaur-like noises in a German accent;
b) immediately show themselves up to be contradictory; or
c) were later contradicted or shown to root from some trauma in The Pub Landlord's past (wife running off with a Frenchman etc).
Unless his act has changed much I can't see much chance of his comedy being frowned upon too much. The implication seems to be that ITV audiences can't understand jokes of types a and b, and don't have the wherewithal to join the dots on jokes of type c. Not really likely. I suppose he's a hit with the type of lads who would 'Hail to the ale' whether Al had made this catchphrase or not, but it's not up to him to be responsible for these people.
Richard, I have to say that
"Maybe they had a baby that was made of shit and it died or something." has just made me spit water over my keyboard. It's a weird thing to be offended by, isn't it? I haven't got any children though, so maybe I just don't get it. You have said much worse and more disturbing things. Even Andrew has probably said worse things. Anyway, food for thought, or something.
Evangeline
That guy clearly thinks it's fine to fuck tortoises in a wound in their shell, but crafting a baby from faeces - come on, you've gone too far now.
Do let me know of any other choice moments from the podcast that you remember as am keen to discuss this prick in podcast 63.
Richard is cross today, isn't he? I look forward to Friday.
Well I've got children and I found Richard's rant hilarious.
Then again my kids appear to made of bone, cartilage, connective tissue etc. so maybe I just assumed he was talking about everyone else's offspring.
Yes, furious. Hei'll be setting up camps next.
I think one of the reasons that Al Murray's Pub Landlord causes so much consternation is is BECAUSE there is that bleed between the real man and the character. Anything too separated cuases problems with the suspension of disbelief and the character's credibility.
That said, I do enjoy a rather unironic chuckle at some of the gags, knowing that that's not really what either I, or he, really think. The fact that what he's saying is frowned upon makes the release when it is said all the more satisfying. It's why I suspect some people (though by no means all) will watch Chubby Brown or (like me) enjoy an occasional listen to the Macc Lads. It is not a reflection on what you think, but more a reflection on the power of being able to laugh at a worldview so out of kilter with your own. There are likely some who will violently disagree with this and will try to berate me for listening to something 'unacceptable'. So what? I know my own mind and comfortable with my own sense of morality.
What all three of these things share is that, beneath the bravado and the smart mouth, they are all in someway losers: Brown's principal target is his own inadequacy, the Macc Lads were dinosaurs in a social landscape that was making them increasingly redundant, while the Pub Landlord is a deeply insecure man covering up his own foibles with his banter.
I am a parent also (of a fantastic five-year-old) and I don't see anything wrong with babies made of shit. In fact, my friends and I (including a medical student) used to joke about foetuses being like the rubbers you used to get on the end of pencils, if you stuck them on the end of the pencil anyway.
Perhpas that's funny, perhaps it's not but I don't think "being a perent" should be used as an excuse for one's own personal queasiness about a subject.
"It's irrelevant what Al's background is. I think it's as bad to judge someone by their upbringing as it is by the colour of their skin."
A) No it isn't. People from public school don't get abuse shouted at them in the street, do not have shit put through their letter box, have not faced years of discrimination when looking for a job or somewhere to live, Barack Obama is not the first privately educated President of the United States, etc etc.
B) Alex B might say something different, but I don't think he was slagging slagging off Al Murray because he went to public school, but rather that the spectacle of someone from a privileged background (in his view) taking the piss out of poor people made him, for whatever reason, uncomfortable. I'm not sure that I agree with him, but it isn't the same as "dismissing someone because of an education they had no say in".
By the way Richard, the routine about babies being human excrement was, in my opinion, the funniest thing I've ever heard you say!
I want to hunt down that unsubscriber and punch them in the face, for their selective censorship and rubbish sense of humour.
More importantly, was Cecil there…..?
Errr good luck Andrew ;-)
Although to be honest I do have a sneaking suspicion that you and Mr H are both lovely warm hearted cuddly cuties who secretly like nothing better than to watch spring lambs gambolling in meadows - but I realise that this would blow your cover as offensive crass alpha males so I won't tell anyone I promise.
No Ian I don't say it's as bad to be someone who went to a public school as it is to be from a minority - I say it's as bad to judge someone for that as it is to judge someone for being black or gay or whatever. Equality is about treating everyone the same, based on who they are, rather than how or where they were brought up.
I experienced a lot of right on comics who would never dare to mock someone for being black, laying into me because they perceived me to be from a public school (which I wasn't even) and thought there was an irony there. Equality is about just that. Someone with moneyed parents isn't any better than than anyone else, but nor are they any worse (not by dint of having gone to public school anyway).
I have seen people who went to public school using the fact that other people have gone to public school as a stick to beat them with. But there's no reason why someone who went to public school can't do a working class character, just as there is no reason why someone who went to a comp can't do a posh character.
The interesting point is that some kinds of prejudice are allowed and courted by those who claim that they want equality. While it is more understandable to be prejudiced against the privileged it doesn't make it right.
I have met many people who went to public school and adjudged them to be twats because of the way they have behaved. But that's OK once you've met them.
That's all my point was. But clearly, yes, minorities have had a much worse time in the world than the upper classes.
Ian - you state many facts in point A. They may very well be true. However, just because these facts are true, why does that mean that it is not 'as bad to judge someone by their upbringing as it is by the colour of their skin'?
I've never been to a "stadium" comedy gig, but maybe that's also part of the problem.
I've been to popular shows at edinburgh (Johnny Vegas for instance), I think to some extent, the experience becomes about something other than "comedian says/does amusing stuff, people laugh" rather it becomes comedian does something familiar (catchphrase etc), recognition, shared feeling of joy among audience.
I suppose when someone does a familiar but shite joke at a stadium gig, it still causes the old pavlovian type reaction- people are primed to laugh at almost anything, even morally questionable stuff, especially when they've paid over the odds to enjoy themselves.
It may be a little like people cheering the intro to "stairway to heaven" at a led zeppelin gig..
matt
I saw The Fast Show live and it was literally a Hammersmith Odeon full of fans cheering catchphrases. Which is not to say it wasn't an enjoyable night. It was. But I agree with your point, Matt. It's not the same as seeing a comic in a small club. It's a rock gig. Which is why I found seeing Al Murray so fascinating - and impressive. I have, on a couple of occasions, introduced bands onstage at festivals, and attempted jokes on both occasions, which seemed to drift out into the void and elicit no reaction. They were probably useless jokes and nobody there wanted to see me, but it's quite something to be able to control a large crowd, even if the responses are Pavlovian. Outside of all the debate about right wing and left wing, and whether a public schoolboy is allowed to impersonate a working class man, I stick with my original observation that Al Murray is a skilled performer.
I don't think there's necessarily wrong with a priviliged person making their living pretending to be a working class one, but the fact that the portrayal is so relentlessly negative and cartoonish does take all the humour out of it for me. To consider other forms of prejudice, as Richard mentions, would Al even consider basing a long-running act on an almost entirely negative portrayal of someone Jewish? Or gay? (Actually, he might, given the hi-larious Gay Nazi character in his sketch show. It's clever, because he's observed that gay people like pink and wear it all the time, and so his Gay Nazi wears pink. It takes a real talent to spot things like that.)
I should add that the first time I saw the Pub Landlord I found it funny, in that knowing way that clearly Al intended at first.
I should also add that I've never met Al, even though I am familiarly referring to him as 'Al'.
One of the highlights of reading Private Eye are the regular "I'm cancelling my subscription after forty years" letters from people shocked by a cartoon or cover that "went too far" for them - invariably where the perceived target is either a child, or someone recently dead.
Fair play for unsubscribing to something that suddenly veers wildly out-of-character into territory you don't agree with, but both Private Eye and the podcast have been nothing if not consistent in their approach. What I'm always impressed by is the act of writing in to say what offended you enough to unsubscribe. It's like you're telling a naughty child to go away and think about what they've done.
What's doubly amusing in this case is that even if you find the concept of babies being sexual excrement offensive (which strikes me as odd - yeah! About time someone stood up for babies!), it's actually a statement of fact at it's basest level.
And, to tie two different threads together, Al Murray does look like an old-fashioned, mischevious, ruddy-cheeked baby in a certain light.
It maybe as ignorant, or as foolish, to judge someone because they went to public school as it is to judge someone because they are black, but it isn't as bad, in my opinion, because the culture and society, to sound like Rick from the young ones for a moment, isn't structurally and institutionally prejudiced against public school boys in a way that negatively affects their life chances and even life expectancy. It also ignores the vastly different histories of the two different groups and the sensitivities involved. It reminds me a bit of Jimmy Hill saying that black footballers should be less sensitive about racial taunts because it was the same as people calling him "chinney". Which I know you were not saying.
Anyway, I suspect we arguing over very little and fundamentally agree about most of this stuff.
If a black bloke acts like an arsehole it's not because he has been black all his life, generally.
If an ex public schoolboy is acting like an arsehole, it is sometimes because they went to public school and have been conditioned with arsehole traits like wanking on crackers.
I often act like an arsehole, and I went to a grammar school. I'm not sure where I fit in.
What is the Pub Landlord character satirising/taking the piss out of - poor people or stupid right-wing people? Plenty of public school educated people hold stupid right-wing views. This is more of a genuine question that it might appear, as I am not an expert on Al Murray's later work (though having seen his weapon impersonations and audience interaction in "the early days" I can well understand Andrew's point that he is a skilled performer).
Also, be careful what you say about the public school educated toffs, they'll be running the country soon. Some of them have moats.
I'd say The Pub Landlord is parodying old fashioned values rather than a satire of right wingers or a pisstake of the poor. The latter is a ludicrous suggestion. As Joyfeed pointed out, plenty of well off people have similar views.
I can't see what you're all so upset about, frankly. Murray inhabits a stereotype for the evening and invites you to poke fun at him, but you spend the evening making presumptions about and sneering at the audience... a wasted ticket?
Not that I'd have gone. His act's a bit old now.
I don't think anybody here has attended an Al Murray Pub Landlord show and "sneered" at the audience. I certainly didn't. You might just as well attend a football match and "sneer" at the crowd.
The character is a parody of a white English nationalist as much as anything else - not a poor person or a working class person. He has what we might called old-fashioned values about sexual politics and gender relations and hates the Germans and the French. As has already been stated, there is a deep sadness to the character, which is easier to divine on television, but harder to get across in an arena, hence the discussion. (I'm hardly the first to make the boil-in-a-bag Nuremberg allusion - although, of course, he hates the Nazis, and loves stadium rock band Queen.)
Fair enough. I never understood the whole Mary Whitehouse Experience stadium comedy thing myself...
I was going to make the football comparison myself as it happens - visiting the Emirates this season I'm hardly surrounded by people who have the same set of values as myself.
I was so disgusted by the babies made out of shit comment that I put my foot through the internet and sent Richard Herring the bill.
Didn't the shameful Ross / Brand affair teach these people anything? This is yet another example of a clique of London-based, left-wing 'comedians' thinking they can say and do blah blah blah blah blah going to the dogs blah blah blah string 'em up blah blah blah hanging's too good for 'em blah blah blah Churchill spinning in his grave, etc.
I don't think some of you understand my point. It is if you believe all people are equal whatever their background, you can't then have a prejudice against public school pupils because of their background. It's just hypocrisy and betrays the fact that maybe there is some jealousy at play. Obviously I am not saying that being a public school boy is a hard life or as bad as being raised from a poor background or that they can claim they are being bullied.
It's just the initial impetus of the person claiming to not judge people by their background then judging someone by their background.
Judge them once you've met them, sure, and most ex public schoolboys do turn out to be twats, but do not make a stereotypical judgement or you as are bad as the people you decry for being judgemental in other areas (I think Jesus managed to put that better).
If I'd 'sneered' at the audience I'd have been 'sneering' at the type of people that closely resemble my immediate family. I detected no sneery vibes. Mind you, I did think "shit, my Nan would have LOVED that" when he did the Indian Call Centre thing.
I was scared of a few of them on the tube home, but only because they were really, really drunk (however did they follow the routines?) and making buffoons of themselves. But you get twats at most comedy gigs, they just tend to disperse quicker exiting the smaller venues.
I think a few people on here have been reading the Guardian a little too much. Get off your P.C. high horses!
It's only a bit of comedy for God sake made to lighten our miserable lives.
If it upsets you go lie down on your Habitat sofa, light a few lavender candles and relax safe in the knowledge you are intellectually superior to the braying masses.
"If it upsets you go lie down on your Habitat sofa, light a few lavender candles and relax safe in the knowledge you are intellectually superior to the braying masses."
My candles are 'Vanilla Spice", I'll have you know!
P.S. What's with the word verification here? Madysita? Is that Portuguese? Is it even a word?
I think Al Murrary Pub Landlord is best as a compere - his presenting on "Edinburgh and Beyond" is super.
Him on his own for an extended period stretches the material a little thin, presumably that's why he needs to pad the set with the lame call-centre gag, celeb photos and conga-line.
On the subject of independent schools; why do they exist? I've never heard a justification. I've heard arguments about why people who work hard and acquire wealth in the process should have the right to pay for an excellent education for their child(ren). This isn't an actual justification for the process of segregation that takes place. Can anyone help? I'm not really interested in about arguments why it's fine for the system to exist, it's a justification I'm interested in. Thanks.
The people with money want the system to continue (as you'd expect). The people with money are also the ones in control.
That's pretty much it
I think the justification for public schools boils down to rowing. Without rowing, we'd win nothing at the Olympic Games. Public school kids love a bit of rowing, and that love translates into sporting glory in their adult lives.
Or it could have something to do with buggery ...
*My word verification is 'lickpfoo'. I'm pleased I came on here today.
Post a Comment
<< Home