Watery Fowls

I often complain about the Daily Mail attacking the BBC. Normally it’s because they're accusing some comedy that dared to make a joke about the queen, the church, the Tories or Adele of being immoral. How dare Jack Whitehall imply the Queen has anal sex? they rant, picking on the weak and vulnerable multi-millionaire monarch who has no way to answer back. It seems from their reports that they don’t like Jack Whitehall’s privileged and wealthy upbringing and lifestyle, they prefer the Queen’s one.

I find a lot of what they complain about to be very tame and comedy should be offensive sometimes, pushing boundaries and dealing with sensitive issues. The BBC3 comedy Way To Go about three friends who build a suicide machine and start an assisted suicide business is actually very funny, quite touching and a surprisingly traditional sitcom given it’s subject matter. Don’t get me wrong, there should be limits and sensitivity in the way comedy tackles ‘dangerous’ topics, for example, I enjoyed 8 Out Of 10 Cats and Have I Got News For You’s mockery of Jimmy Saville (and I’m sure I would have enjoyed Mock The Week’s too, had they had the balls not to edit it all out), certainly he needed taking down a peg or two following the whole Paedoing thing, but I’m not sure Cbeebies was the best place to show a parody of a paedo. If there’s anything more creepy than Jimmy Saville, it would be a Tweenie dressed as him. That, or the giggling sun baby and submarine periscopes that watch over the Tellytubbies, I seriously didn’t like those things. The fact that almost everything in the Tellytubby world sounds like it’s been named after a sexual organ doesn’t help (Tinkie Winkie, Lala, Noo-noo).

I’m not unbiased in this. I love comedy and I love comedy that’s controversial, and the Daily Mail’s position is possibly more popular with mainstream television viewers. Their opinions on TV comedy might seem old-fashioned and safe, but perhaps that’s was people want. So let’s take something that offends them this week and see if we can’t come to see it from their point of view.

Don’t worry, I’m obviously not going to do that. I’m just setting them up for a fall.

So what old-fashioned value is the Mail justly defending this week. Please tell me Buster Baxter from Hey Arthur! hasn’t been dressing up as Roul Moat. Here’s what’s getting on their festering, foot-and-mouth ridden goat this week: “It is the episode of Fawlty Towers best remembered for the line ‘Don’t mention the war’ and John Cleese’s silly walk when impersonating Hitler. The references have proved controversial before, but when The Germans, was repeated on BBC2 on Sunday evening it wasn’t our European neighbours that the corporation was worried about offending. Instead, the episode was edited to omit racist language.” How sad to see the so-called British Broadcasting Corporation running old-fashioned racism into the ground.

The scene in question involved the major (one of sitcoms best supporting characters) talking to Basil about his wife, in which he ends up rambling on about a woman he used to know who he took to see India. “India?” “At the oval.” A section of the scene in question is available to watch on YouTube and it’s very funny. The line that the BBC edited out when it aired the episode at 7:30 on Sunday was: “And the strange thing was that throughout the morning, she kept referring to the Indians as niggers. ‘No no no no no,’ I said. ‘Niggers are the West Indians, these people are wogs.’” A number of complaints have been sent to the BBC about this brutal edit. Possibly many of them not whipped up by the Daily Mail but most of them probably by readers of the Mail. You can tell by how many times they use the phrase Political Correctness.

That’s what this is all about, the BBC giving into political correctness. It has nothing to do, so far as the Mail can see, with broadcasting offensive language before the watershed. The scene isn’t actually offensive or racist. The joke is about the rambling story of a senile old man with some bigoted views. The n-word/w-bombs line is about the stupidity of racism. The Germans as a whole, if you want to analyze it and take all the fun out of a program made just to brighten your dreary Sunday night, is all about showing up silly outdated views. In the same scene the major declares he hates Germans, but loves women, and Polly even calls him out: “What about German women?” “Good card players” but the major “wouldn’t give them the time of day.” There are also sexist remarks made during the same scene that do the same.

So it’s not that the scene is racist and the Mail isn’t saying that it is, just that it shouldn’t have been edited. It’s a good bet that their main gripe is that they’d already paid the lad who does the columns to write about how awful it is that the BBC said Niggers at an hour when children would be watching and they had to scrap that entire piece. I haven’t seen that word said in a BBC comedy for a few years, but you can bet if it was the Mail would insist that it be deported. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with using the word in that context. Blazing Saddles, in making it’s anti-racism point, drops more n-bombs than president Obama’s drones drop actual bombs. I think it’s fine to use that kind of language sensibly, well and in the right context, I’m just not sure that right context is Sunday night just after Countryfile when there might be kids watching. If anybody is still watching after Countryfile that is. I think the reason the BBC would choose to cut the offending words has more to do with when it was shown and who could be watching than it has to do with offence it could cause. Sex scenes are very rarely offensive, unless you know the really good websites, but on TV they’re mostly used to show love between two characters and it’s all lovely and that and you see a bit of booby, but I don’t think we should put them on after Songs Of Praise (actually…I probably do). I didn’t watch the repeat in question, but I’d be interested to know if they also edited out the b-bomb “Forgive and forget major. God knows how - the bastards,” because that might help prove this theory of mine.

So now the BBC is facing a letter writing campaign urging them to air racist insults. One complainer wrote to say that they “doubt anyone but the terminally thin skinned could be offended by the major.” Surprisingly though, I always thought the terminally thin-skinned was a category the Mail fell into. Anyone who thinks #Susanalbumparty is disgusting enough to warrant complaints to Ofcom would probably be offended by the word Fiddlest**ks. Another chipped in to defend the fictional major’s comments saying “We are all grown up you know,” well no, we’re not. Actually a considerable number of us are children (that’s the way our species works), at 7:30 on a Sunday night they may be putting off their homework for Monday morning by watching TV and they’re very creative when it comes to swearing by themselves without the need for us to be exposing them to any more of it. To be honest, I respect the BBC’s decision on this is all. I would probably defend a decision to include the offending remarks too on the grounds that really it doesn’t matter and the Mail should be finding bigger things to complain about. (Isn’t there a referendum on Europe coming up? Can’t you dig up some one-sided half stories to help voters decide which way to vote no?) As I say I would defend the inclusion of the major’s potty mouthed rant, but another of the complaints addressed to the BBC reads “Let’s face it, the whole episode, and most of Fawlty Towers is racist by today’s standards and misogynistic.” Well, no. That’s one of those times when someone joins the argument on your side and you just walk away from it because your side now looks like a joke. “Oh it’s all racist, get over it,” is not a defense and it’s blatantly untrue. Hypocritical of me though it is to suggest you should think your argument through and not just voice the first rant to come to mind, that is what I’m saying to that unnamed viewer.

Richard Littlejohn, a computer designed by the Daily Mail into which any fact can be fed and the “Richard Littlejohn 1.0” will link it to the phrase “It’s political correctness gone mad,” has terribly written a terrible piece of mock script on what Fawlty Towers might be like if it was made today in the oh-so-politically-correct climate that his paper tries to force Jack Whitehall and co. to conform to. (I think if it’s old rude comedy it’s fine, but anything post 1980, the Mail don’t really get. Someone tried to explain The Young Ones to them, but they just didn’t know why Vyvian would fly through the wall on a giant wrecking ball or how that got there.) Here are some choice low-lights from his article.

“Major: Papers arrived yet Fawlty?”
Fawlty: Absolutely Major. Ever since that wonderful Indian family took over the newsagents they’re on the doorstep at 5am prompt.”

I’m not sure if we’ve been told to say that because of PC, or if it’s just true.

“Major: I took her to see India.
Fawlty: At the oval?
Major: No, India. Wonderful country, charming people. Industrious, honest as the day is long, marvelous cooks. More billionaires than you can shake a stick at. Got their own space program too.”

Again, that seems from the documentaries I’ve seen and the always-wanted-to-go-there rubbish in my head to be, broadly speaking, true. Also I’m not sure the “forces” of political correctness would care about “at the oval” being a punch line or reassigning it to another character.

“Fawlty: A few Indian billionaires might raise the tone of this place, not like the usual riff-raff we get in here.
Major: Riff-raff?
Fawlty: Torbay Conservative Association, Women’s institute, Countryside Alliance.”

I don’t think anybody is calling the WI riff-raff (and I’ve been a waiter at their Christmas parties, loads of drunk old ladies undressing me with their eyes and then holding a raffle!). As for the other two, the Countryside Alliance website seems like they’re mostly concerned with feeding living things to packs of dogs to tear apart and shooting at other things while Torbay Conservative Association are probably just cunts, who should holiday somewhere further afield than Torquay. Think I might get a week in Hatfield this year.

“Fawlty: Complained about the view from her room.
Major: The view?
Fawlty: What do you expect to see from a Torquay hotel window: Sydney Opera House? The Hanging Gardens Of Babylon? Herds of wildebeest sweeping majestically?”

Well there you’ve just copied out an actual Fawlty Towers quote to get a laugh. You can’t do that. Unless it’s like when I did it just then.

“Sybil: Why are all those caravans cluttering up the car park, Basil?
Fawlty: I’m glad you asked that, dear. I’ve agreed that the travelling community can use the car park until they find an alternative to dale farm.”

That’s not stupid coz PC is stupid, it just makes no business sense for a hotel manager.

Basically to spoil it all for you, it turns out the hotel is open to all guests regardless of race, class or sexuality. Some choice phrases include: “Why didn’t you use those nice Polish builders?” (instead of O’Reily. Apparently Irish immigrants are better than Polish on the Mail scale of panic).
“Major: Don’t tell me you’re lifting the ban on ladies wearing trousers?

Fawlty: No, I’m lifting the ban on men wearing dresses…Fawlty Towers is becoming Torquay’s first Trans-friendly hotel.”

A common theme you might notice is words like friendly or nice or being nice to people come up a lot. I agree this makes for terrible comedy, but as a case against political correctness, it actually makes it sound quite nice.

So to sum up: Keep the bad words in, or cut them out. Either way the Mail would have complained. Either way it wouldn’t have mattered much. But just to piss them off, lets respond by putting a lot more foul language in pre-watershed comedy. That’s the keynote point of the whole argument.