Ali G in the USA is broadcast in the USA, and has been met with an unenthusiastic response. While the States produces some of the funniest comedy around - Seinfeld, The Simpsons, South Park, Futurama plus all those films - it doesn't surprise me that American don't 'get' Ali G. I'm quite glad they don't, to be honest. British comedy is very parochial and funny mainly to those in the parish - whether it's the more stylish and subtle programmes like Spaced or the brilliantly puerile such as Bottom, it is characterised by its Britishness. Americans wouldn't get it, not because of the often argued assumption that they have no sense of irony, but because they aren't British, they don't give a shit about the British and they're quite happy with their own products. The only reason that good American comedy is so popular in this country is because, having had to swallow over the past 40 years a interminable volume of American culture, the British are familiar with American humour, understand it and have grown to like it. The mistake that is often made is that the reverse might be true. Why should it be? It's no surprise to me that the only comedy that has managed to sucessfully travel to the States is either the very basic (Benny Hill) or those broad comedies made with a very decided objective of attracting an American audience - Four Weddings, Shakespeare in Love, Bean...there are of course exceptions, Monty Python being the most evident.

However two things relating to the States's rejection of Ali G do bother me. First, apparently some victims, like Ralph 'man of the people' Nader are considering suing. Grow up, you fucking humourless idiot.

Secondly, and this is the thing that really bugs me, tv reviewers in the States objected to Ali G referring to 11 September as "7/11". Apparently this trivialises the tragic event and is tasteless. Hang on just a bloody minute, this is hypocrisy of the most contemptible sort. It takes a very stupid or wilfully blind person to rush to condemn from an easy moral position, completely ignoring the United States's own trivialisation of the event in terming it "9/11" in the first place. It's a horribly 'trendy' media tag, a corporate brand (easy to fit on Baseball caps and T shirts) and an iconic logo, designed to promote gung-ho glamour and mock-Hollywood heroics. All of what "9/11" is, as opposed to "September 11" or "The Attacks on New York and Washington", gave George W Bush the power to manipulate his people into supporting a questionable war. Ali G is still sometimes about satire (as it used to be all the time) and referring to "9/11" as "7/11" (a corporation) along with the reaction that this has had (highlighting the all too frequent American political and media hypocrisy) demonstrates that it can still work.

Comments (2)

Going into work this morning was a horrifically depressing experience, my senses mutely crumpling in despair when woken by the fucking builders across the street at 6 in the morning, and still not recovered.
It is amazing how quickly office existence can trample over all the good that a recent weekend has done. Lamb on Friday night, at Brixton academy, were outstanding and uplifting, as always. Even some narky bitch in the crowd during their last tune, Cotton Wool, couldn't destroy my good mood. I can't wait to see them at Glastonbury (here's hoping they make it). Then on Saturday an equally excellent gig at the Astoria, where Blur were great, the songs from Think Tank sounding twice as good as they do on the album - and my only gripe about Graham not being there was no Coffee and TV.
Then back to cramming anything individual into the grim and rushed mornings, or the speedily receding hours before sleep. Is it any surprise that people come up with this or this every now and again?
Or perhaps it's more to do with watching a repeat of This Life on Sunday night, which finished with a jubilant Egg, swigging champagne, laughing Bollocks to the Law.

Click here to add a comment

'Moore' (sorry) on Roger. The man is a true British icon.

Click here to add a comment

Although he's older than Sean Connery and has been very ill in the past I've always thought the great Lord Roger of Mooreshire was super-human (and perhaps nowadays he may be a bit bionic). Anyway the news of him collapsing on stage is worrying. I hope it's nothing serious, and he can struggle on to, one day, get that knighthood.

Click here to add a comment

Published today is the Broadcasting Standards Commission's latest bulletin - it doesn't sound like the most fascinating document in the world, but I like to browse through it - some of the things people complain about are laughable: I am convinced that there are people out there who desperately want to be outraged and offended - they travel the airwaves rejoicing once they find a muttered four-letter word or catch a flash of nipple or a bit of good natured innuendo. For example, one complaint, not upheld, related to the use of excessive nudity on the Adult Channel's Freeview.

I wonder what the complainant expected to see on the Adult channel. Perhaps an insightful documentary about that curious species, the Older Human. Maybe a frank and in depth discussion about chess (with the panelists concluding by giving each other a good chessing) - I remember at the department store in which I used to work there was a department called Adult Games, full of Scrabble, Chess, Backgammon and so on - so disappointing for a young sales assistant.

It's annoying to see some complaints upheld, especially when only one, of hundreds of thousands of viewers, has complained. For example in the bulletin a complaint about Electric 6's music video to Danger! High Voltage has been upheld after one viewer complained about sexually explicit content. The bulletin describes the action in the video:

"...two characters in a country house setting expressed their growing sexual desire, visibly cued by the use of illuminated lights around their breast and/or genital area".

The Standards panel dealing with the complaint recognised that the video was supposed to be "ludicrous" but in the end decided that "the level of sexual explicitness had exceeded acceptable limits for broadcast in the early evening on an open access channel."

What a load of bollocks. While there are some perfectly understandable complaints dotted around in the bulletin most of the complaints highlight that there still exists in this country pockets of the trivially offended, still wading in the mire of absurd Victorian morals, that would be risible if they weren't so self-righteously destructive. Personally I reckon the more filth and bad language on the telly the better. There's always the remote control - if people have the ability to get out their letter writing kit to vomit their outrage to the BSC regarding a homosexual kiss or dramatised blood soaked murder surely it would be much easier to simply turn over, or turn off.

Click here to add a comment