A SKETCH INSPIRED BY THE "GHOSTS" THREAD

BCG MEMBER 1: I watched a 2-hour Netflix special last night - "America's Top Black Comedians".

BCG MEMBER 2: What did you think?

BCG MEMBER 1: Absolutely brilliant, apart from a couple who weren't much good.

BCG MEMBER 2: Apart from what?

BCG MEMBER 1: A couple of them weren't up to much.

BCG MEMBER 2: Racist!

FADE DOWN AND UP TO INDICATE PASSAGE OF TIME

BCG MEMBER 1: Hey, I've watched another 2-hour Netflix special - "America's Top Women Comedians".

BCG MEMBER 2: What did you think?

BCG MEMBER 1: They were all absolutely brilliant, and you know what? The black ones and the Asian ones were even funnier than the white ones!

BCG MEMBER 2: I think I love you.

END.

Quote: garyd @ 23rd May 2019, 4:17 PM

I
Personally I felt the casting of Mike was incorrect. Yes, I didn't think Alison would have found him a particularly attractive proposition for a boyfriend/husband.
The actor doesn't strike me as being sufficiently good looking and the character seems a bit stupid. I'm sure not all white women find black men to their liking, the same as they don't find all white men so (and I should know!). And vice versa, of course. I don't think that makes me RACIST and would be surprised and disappointed if anyone did.

View original

I wasn't directing the racism charge at you at all. Nothing you said up until this post suggested you had anything other than perfectly sound reasons for disliking Ghosts. You didn't even mention race.
You obviously haven't read what I wrote properly if you thought I was attacking people simply for legitimately disagreeing with me. I pretty much said the opposite.
What are you talking about in the above quote though? I literally don't understand. You seem to be getting very muddled here.

Quote: Rood Eye @ 23rd May 2019, 7:40 PM

A SKETCH INSPIRED BY THE "GHOSTS" THREAD

BCG MEMBER 1: I watched a 2-hour Netflix special last night - "America's Top Black Comedians".

BCG MEMBER 2: What did you think?

BCG MEMBER 1: Absolutely brilliant, apart from a couple who weren't much good.

BCG MEMBER 2: Apart from what?

BCG MEMBER 1: A couple of them weren't up to much.

BCG MEMBER 2: Racist!

FADE DOWN AND UP TO INDICATE PASSAGE OF TIME

BCG MEMBER 1: Hey, I've watched another 2-hour Netflix special - "America's Top Women Comedians".

BCG MEMBER 2: What did you think?

BCG MEMBER 1: They were all absolutely brilliant, and you know what? The black ones and the Asian ones were even funnier than the white ones!

BCG MEMBER 2: I think I love you.

END.

View original

Not much of a sketch as a) not actually funny and b) basically dishonest.
Clearly deliberately misunderstanding my point.
As I said: "I liked Ghosts. You don't have to. It's a legitimate view - there are certainly things wrong with it.
But if you didn't like it simply because two of the cast are black or because some of them are women, clearly the problem lies not with Ghosts, but with you."

Quote: Chris Hallam @ 24th May 2019, 6:08 AM

Not much of a sketch as . . . Not actually funny

View original

If that is your genuine opinion, then you're perfectly entitled both to hold it and to express it upon this forum.

If, however, your real reason for saying it's not funny is that you believe I am black or Asian or a member of some other ethnic minority or that I am a woman or that I am gay or disabled or transgendered, then the problem lies very much with you rather than with my sketch.

(See what I did there?)

Great. You're not addressing the issue though.

Quote: Chris Hallam @ 24th May 2019, 10:01 AM

Great. You're not addressing the issue though.

View original

I think I've addressed the issue both directly and quite effectively.

Some people on BCG have stated that "Ghosts" isn't funny.

You have stated that my sketch isn't funny.

The issue in both cases is whether or not those statements are in fact motivated genuinely by perceived unfunniness or simply by prejudice against one or more of the people involved in the presentation of the material.

Lots of people have said they don't like Ghosts on here. Most have had legitimate reasons for doing so. I have some reservations about it myself.

A few other people, however, have been posting crap like this:

In the last of these scenes, one of the ghosts on the TV turns to camera and says "We've got a mixed-race couple and a black ghost in this sitcom so, if you don't like it, you must be racist!"
(The first mention of race in this discussion. Nobody has actually put forward this view, then or now).

Apart from not being funny, the BBC's pro-diversity messages might as well be delivered with a loudhailer through our letterboxes as painted upon our TV screens in such large letters.

How many black guys in real life inherit an English country mansion?... without wanting to labour the point too much, how many white women of the class generally needed to belong to for actually inheriting a country pile would be attached to a black man, in real life?
It's a long shot, if not impossible. Let's be honest, the silliness of the show's subject itself has afforded the prods the ideal chance to throw in a token bame character to get their diversity quota score up without causing too much fuss.

But lo, the deceased scout masters son has married an ethnic minority - there's a surprise!

He wasn't black - well rather dusky looking.

Anyone with an ounce of integrity could see from the trailer alone that the partner of the woman who inherited the mansion is a token ethnic offering to boost their quota.

Yes, the attempted handing the bottle of wine to the annoying black, female ghost and inevitable breaking on the floor was painful!

I think the point in her character is that a black female ghost (whether funny or not) ticks boxes for the diversity quota.
With regard to her comedic talents (be they great, small or absolutely non-existent), the fact of the matter is that, in this modern day and age, if she identifies as "talented" she must be treated by one and all - and that, of course, includes employers and industry peers - as if she really is talented.
I suppose we must be grateful that she doesn't identify as a slim, white, tremendously talented male comedian.
If she did, you can bet your bottom dollar she'd have beaten Steve Coogan to the role of Stan Laurel.
(I don't think Steve Coogan would like his name being used to back up this argument)

Maybe they just love the diversity of it and want to big it up with unmerited praise. Except, of course, that diversity isn't just about black people: it's also about the inclusion of women, the disabled, LGBGT, Asians, other ethnic minorities and, of course, relationships. It's also about how people are portrayed on television. Women are plentiful among the cast and there's a man whose head has parted company with his body - that's a pretty significant disability.
However, getting back to ethnicity, if I remember correctly there was an episode in which a group of what appeared to be Boy Scouts were having an archery lesson: there were five boys, three of whom were non-Caucasian (one being black, and two Asian). That's diversity on a truly astonishing scale in an organisation whose white membership has never been less than 95%.
Moreover, when assessing the show's contribution to the diversity initiative, it is also highly significant that the couple who inherited the stately home comprises a white woman with a black husband - a setup which would, in itself, have provided a basis for a controversial "Play for Today" on the BBC of the 1970s. Given that such a married relationship is rare in the UK (only 7% of couples - married or otherwise - are interracial), its inclusion as the basis of the relationship between the two inheritors must be seen as a massive contribution to the diversity initiative.

All in all, therefore, "Ghosts" represents quite a powerful hand in the game of ethnic Top Trumps.

Personally I felt the casting of Mike was incorrect. Yes, I didn't think Alison would have found him a particularly attractive proposition for a boyfriend/husband.
The actor doesn't strike me as being sufficiently good looking and the character seems a bit stupid. I'm sure not all white women find black men to their liking, the same as they don't find all white men so (and I should know!).

Chris, I think you're intelligent enough to realise that pointing out examples of clumsy and heavy-handed implementation of the BBC's diversity initiative is a perfectly legitimate thing to do on any forum dedicated to the discussion of TV programmes.

I also think you're intelligent enough to realise that actors and comedians can be good, bad, or indifferent at their jobs - entirely independently of their race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

If some people say "Ghosts" or any associated actor isn't funny, it's entirely possible that they're saying it for legitimate reasons. Likewise, if some people say that a black actor in "Ghosts" or any other TV programme or film has been miscast, it's entirely possible that they're saying it for legitimate reasons.

Black actors, black comedians and women (of various races) have been appearing on TV in Britain for a very long time and yet I don't recall another TV programme which has come in for criticism on BCG in the same way that "Ghosts" has.

I have to put it to you, therefore, that the criticism attracted by "Ghosts" on BCG has far more to do with the program itself that it has to do with racism, misogyny or any other form of bigotry.

Quote: Rood Eye @ 24th May 2019, 11:46 AM

Chris, I think you're intelligent enough to realise that pointing out examples of clumsy and heavy-handed implementation of the BBC's diversity initiative is a perfectly legitimate thing to do on any forum dedicated to the discussion of TV programmes.

I also think you're intelligent enough to realise that actors and comedians can be good, bad, or indifferent at their jobs - entirely independently of their race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

If some people say "Ghosts" or any associated actor isn't funny, it's entirely possible that they're saying it for legitimate reasons. Likewise, if some people say that a black actor in "Ghosts" or any other TV programme or film has been miscast, it's entirely possible that they're saying it for legitimate reasons.

Black actors, black comedians and women (of various races) have been appearing on TV in Britain for a very long time and yet I don't recall another TV programme which has come in for criticism on BCG in the same way that "Ghosts" has.

I have to put it to you, therefore, that the criticism attracted by "Ghosts" on BCG has far more to do with the program itself that it has to do with racism, misogyny or any other form of bigotry.

View original

A good response. But I wouldn't agree that having two black cast members out of a regular cast of (I think) twelve people is particularly clumsy or heavy-handed. Nor is the fact about half of the cast are women. This is the world we live in!
Some people always complain along these lines whenever an ethnic minority, homosexual or disabled person character appears in anything. Imagine if one of the existing characters was revealed to be homosexual in the second series. This actually wouldn't be statistically surprising yet I can almost hear the chorus of disapproval from some on here already. It shouldn't be like that really should it?
(Although actually I think it's been suggested one of the characters is gay already, come to think it?)
I've discussed Ghosts on another forum. There, as here, some people liked it more than others. Some who were critical suggested it was too much like a children's programme, some suggested it was muddled or unfunny. Fair points. A good discussion. And, unlike here, nobody else brought up race or gender issues at all. Most people watched it and enjoyed or disliked it entirely on its merits or weaknesses.
A shame that hasn't happened here.

I understand what you're saying but my take on the situation is somewhat different from yours.

There are, I think, two potentially controversial types of opinion being expressed in this thread: one concerns the non-Caucasians cast in the programme and the other concerns the funniness (or otherwise) of Lolly Adefope.

I don't think anybody has complained that having two black characters in a main cast of twelve is outrageously improbable from a statistical point of view. Similarly, I don't think anybody has complained that having two black characters among the main cast detracts from the enjoyability (or adds to the awfulness) of the programme.

Mention has been made of the mixed-race couple that inherited the stately home. I think it's reasonable to mention that statistical improbability because the casting clearly indicates a desire to tick diversity boxes.

Likewise, the casting of three non-white actors in a Boy Scout troop of five individuals indicates a desire to tick diversity boxes as the reality is that you'd need a troop of about a hundred scouts to have any realistic expectation of finding three non-white scouts among them.

As for Lolly, what can I say? She earns a living as a comedian and, as such, there will be people who think she's funny and people who think she's not. Both camps are entitled to express their views regarding her funniness or lack thereof on this forum. I honestly don't think her detractors are influenced by her race.

My own view is that she's not very funny (although I've certainly seen worse) and she is being pushed forward and upwards for reasons totally unconnected with her comedic or theatrical talents. That sort of thing happens in show business.

In summary, I think we have to distinguish between that which is racial and that which is racist. "Ghosts" has been cast with an eye to redressing the racial balance among characters portrayed on television rather than with an eye to representing the world as it is. That casting has been noticed by some BCG members and they have exercised their right to comment upon it.

However, I do not believe that any of the comments were racist or otherwise bigoted.

A good answer.
However, I would not agree that the presence of a mixed race couple is in anyway unusual or statistically unlikely. Most couples are not mixed but it's common enough, these days. I know one mixed race couple. The unlikely bit is that they inherited a big house like that in the first place completely out of the blue, but that was a dramatic device. Most married couples are not in their 20s either!

"Likewise, the casting of three non-white actors in a Boy Scout troop of five individuals indicates a desire to tick diversity boxes as the reality is that you'd need a troop of about a hundred scouts to have any realistic expectation of finding three non-white scouts among them." There were definitely six cubs not five. I just watched it again. As far as I could tell two were from ethnic minorities (conceivably three - you'd have to be watching very closely). So about 33%. Higher than you'd expect, yes. But not really significant, I'd argue.

I've just watched the "scouts" scene again and I can count only five boys.

Most of the shots are in relative close-up and so there could always, in theory, be an extra scout or two standing at the end of the line, out of shot.

There is one aerial shot however, that shows the group from a considerable distance - and there are clearly only five of them standing there.

In any event, whether there are five or six of them, there would nevertheless need to be about a hundred of them for the displayed ethnic diversity to be representative of real-life in 1984. My point, as ever, is not that there were three non-white children in the episode: it's that there were three non-white children crowbarred into a scene rather than letting them appear in a scene where their ethnicity would have been entirely unremarkable. Basically, it was heavy-handed implementation of the diversity initiative.

Regarding mixed-race married couples, according to the 2011 census, only 8% of married couples in Britain are mixed race (and they are very rare indeed outside our major cities). Whether we like it or not, such marriages remain controversial among all but the most liberal groups in our society. Accordingly, it seems more than likely that the inheriting couple's inter-ethnicity was deliberate rather than accidental - and intended solely to put ticks into diversity boxes.

I welcome diversity on TV - but not when it misrepresents the society it purports to depict.

You are right! I can't count. I totally apologise.
But...
About one in ten UK marriages are mixed? I can believe that. And that isn't rare! It's not as if every other show features a mixed couple.
My Family featured a dentist. Less than 10 percent of people are dentists. How unrepresentative!
No. One in ten isn't rare at all

As I said earlier, interracial marriages - whether we like it or not - remain controversial outside the most liberal sections of our society.

It was an exceedingly bold move on the part of the BBC to cast an interracial pair as the inheritors of the stately home but it was (to me) obviously done as part of the diversity initiative.

I applaud their bravery but I'd prefer to see inclusivity occur seamlessly rather than loudly and clumsily.

It can be done and I have every confidence that, before too long it will be done.

But it still isn't rare enough to make it in anyway unrealistic.
Time has moved on. Harry and Meghan's marriage generated v little controversy on that front .
It is not the job of the BBC to pander to the prejudices of the dwindling racist minority who still oppose interracial marriages.
Good for them

I would hope we all agree, regardless of our backgrounds and who we are, that in one way or another, it is patronising, contradictory, sad and hypocritical for casting of actors and actresses to be based on anything other than sheer talent and to the narative of the story.

My prior critism is that the aformentioned Lolly Adefope's CHARACTER was simply not funny. All of the others at one point made me laugh. If I were to be scraping the barel of fairness, then the headless bloke isn't funny (but he is hardly seen) as well as the lady of the house played by Martha Howe-Douglas. But at least her character is set-up for comedic moments. I just found her portrayal a bit irritating more than anything.

FYI Kiell Smith-Bynoe has made me laugh in this. Could they have cast better? Yes. And that goes for Charlotte Ritchie.

I guess what I am trying to say is, I am not a racist.

Do I doth protest too much? :-)

That was a joke.

I am not a racist.