// Blog
Carry on Sergeant?
I must say, I’m rather bemused by the national outcry over John Sergeant’s resignation from (the stupidly named) Strictly Come Dancing.
Now, I don’t care for either of them, but this and the continuing outry over how far some X-Factor hopefuls got just confirms my belief that there’s a problem with the way people in this country vote. Why in God’s name do people get so attached to people who are crap?
It’s a dancing competition for God’s sake. Entertainment yes, but many things are and as far as I’m concerned fun is something so fundamentally important as to be taken seriously. (In the same way as nothing is so sacred it can’t be poked fun of.)
I’m sorry, but people who are daft enough to vote for someone who can’t dance in a dancing show clearly deserve to lose their money in order to teach them a lesson. (Preferably to go to charity, natch.)
Jesus… this voting for people who amuse us is what got bloody Johnson in after all.
Posted on November 22, 2008 | Filed Under Film and Television, The World we Live In
Comments
Response left by Pandemonia on November 25th, 2008
Got something to say?
This is one of the fundamental problems with reality TV - it’s not about talent or skills, it’s about likeability - or the lack thereof. The British public feel that they can influence anything they want for the most spurious of reasons.
They vote for people because:
A) They’re nice, but often not too nice.
B) They’re pretty, but not too pretty.
C) They’re good at something unrelated. i.e. (I’ll vote for my favourite football player even though they’re plainly rubbish at ice skating in scuba gear.
D) They’re not the judge’s choice and the judges were a bit rude about them.
E) They’re the underdog.
Now we like the underdog, it’s one of those things that exemplify the British psyche. We think that it’s jolly unfair if they don’t have a chance. This is a commendable feature up to a point, but coupled with our tendency to take our pleasures sadly and glory in failure, it does mean that we’re destined for Jordan to be our Prime Minister.
A) She’s easy – good to know if you’re an outraged fad middle aged Daily Mail reader – even you are in with a chance!
B) She’s considered by some to have the criteria for being pretty (that’s not the word, there needs to be one, maybe glamonster) – but a bit tacky, both physically and conceptually.
C) She’s good at self publicising – not just positive publicity but any.
D) Everyone thinks she’s quite dumb so therefore deserves a chance to prove she’s not – or at least until she does something really stupid.
E) She’s low down the social scale and she’s a dog.
That coupled with the national disaster’s that’d occur if she was in charge – well glory in her failure – just what the country likes and there’s never be a time when we didn’t know what was going on! She’d be monitored 24 hours a day.
And the public absolve themselves from blame about the situation. We chose her and she messed it up. Of course she messed it up – you chose her.
Remember politics no one voted for Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. We voted for (or against) the parties that they represent. And people, don’t kick up a fuss because someone you don’t like is in charge of the party. You gave them the ability to be there – and it could always be worse. Jordan’ll give anything a go. Ask Gareth Gates.