Thursday, April 26, 2012

The Professor Mary Beard ruckus and British vs. North American telly

The basic idea.
There was much brouhaha induced this week in Britain. It was prompted by restaurant and television critic A.A.Gill making some very unwise and ill-considered remarks about the appearance of the highly intelligent and witty academic Mary Beard (presenter of the current telly program The Romans and writer of the blog "A Don's Life").

In particular, he called her “too ugly for television” which earned him this strong yet civilized rebuke in the Daily Mail (of all newspapers!) Twitter has been buzzing with the fallout, followed by a large groundswell of support for Beard. I'm rather dismayed by this whole episode, having in the past been an ardent fan of Gill's food writing. Personal disappointment aside, it does raise the interesting fact of the British/North American divide in the Hollywood-ish “attractiveness” scale of television personalities. It seems, all to the good in my opinion, that British television (perhaps as it is still in many ways dominated by the BBC) allows more scope for intelligent and interesting commentators to rise to the surface. It has long been noted, by people such as Ricky Gervais and others, that stereotypical “British teeth” would simply not be tolerated on American television. Perhaps it is a culture which values witticisms and a knowledge of Wittgenstein rather more?

I am interested in the thoughts of my fellow contributors on this subject... 

@idlehistorian 

On Sunday morning (EST), I awoke to tweets in support of Mary Beard. I knew she had a new special on tv but these weren't regular messages conveying general enjoyment/ congratulations for an interesting episode. It turns out A.A. Gill (since when did he become a tv critic? are the skills of "critic" universal and so transferable?) had turned his sights on Professor Beard. Specifically, he thought that she could have scrubbed up a bit nicer ("Did she try to look so haggard?" and "Shouldn't she be sexing herself up a bit?" were some of his choice remarks) if she was to appear in our living rooms to share her insights about Ancient Roman society.

Gill's writing has a prickly quality. It's amusing when he applies his skills to skewering country pubs or Pizza Express. It is categorically unfunny when he's being unabashedly mean-spirited about something as trivial as the shape/ size of someone's teeth. As if Mary Beard has nothing to offer to the television audience if she's not "hot"/ attractive/ conventionally beautiful. In this clip, she's teaching students the merits of Latin and the Classics. Her enthusiasm is infectious. Is it the case that her messy tresses were so distracting that he couldn't even hear what she had to say?

The first (and cheapest) response would be: has he looked in the mirror recently? No doubt there would be a section of women who find his lean librarian-like features appealing. But, that would be stooping to Gill's level. I was more intrigued by this idea that Gill put forth that one had to conform to a specific idea of "presentable" to be taken seriously on television. As the @IdleHistorian mentioned, this seemed to me a very American/ Hollywood value that is inconsistent with what I have come to understand as the standard for British tv. Sure, things might be getting blonder or glossier but this is a relatively recent phenomenon. The UK is a country where: David Starkey, Andrew Marr, and Jeremy Clarkson regularly appear on telly and directly shape the public discourse on politics and history. They certainly don't have the boyish good looks/ perma-tan of a Brian Willams (NBC Nightly News) or Matt Lauer (The Today Show) but neither does the public require that of them. The most popular and long running evening soaps in the UK are Coronation Street and Eastenders, where most characters look like slightly more attractive versions of regular people. In Britain, the elderly stay on the small screens and are culturally relevant in a way that is unknown in the North American context. It is also the case that historians/ academics/ scholars take on much more of a public role in the UK. Until Starkey proclaimed his agreement with Enoch Powell's 1968 "Rivers of Blood" speech on Newsnight, he presented at least one special program a year. In Canada, history themed shows rarely get attention outside of publicly owned stations: PBS, CBC, TVO.

This quality, for me, has made British tv grittier and more "authentic." It's something that is more relatable and more intellectually stimulating. It places the emphasis on the quality of content over the flash aesthetics. So, I found Gill's remarks childish to be sure but also un-British.

As I'm writing this, it also occurs to me that this is a gender issue. Gill thought he could get away with being a bully because Professor Beard is a woman and he could count on support from other "lads" (and women too because as Samantha Brick claimed, we're catty like that) who were also offended by her wrinkly skin. Unfortunately for Gill, the episode has exposed his sexist tendencies. Maybe he should stick to critiquing food. Food doesn't fight back. He clearly doesn't have the same charm as Charlie Brooker when it comes to processing the small screen. 

Badly done old chap.

@SloaneScholar1 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...