This being the self-congratulatory "blogosphere", I might as well weigh in. This is what the interweb's for, right?
I'm quite glad this was on TV. I've been trying (not very hard, mind) to see this for ages, and it was much easier to stay in on a Saturday night and watch it than to plan a trip out in London.
The first act was quite funny.
The second act, not so much.
Then again, I've always liked Stewart Lee's stuff.
I must say, though, that now that I've been subjected to over 8,000 swear words, I'm going to find it terribly hard to go to work tomorrow and have a civil conversation. I am particularly fearful of having to speak to any clients on the phone, for it is extremely likely now that I will have no choice but to submit them to a barrage of quite unwholesome language. I can feel the moral fibre within me shrivelling as I type. In fact, I am sure now, more than ever before, that Jesus is a nappy-wearing gay baby. I had my suspicions before, but henceforth my opinion of Christianity has been irrevocably coloured. I am not sure I can set foot in a church, chapel or cathedral ever again. I am grateful that, but for the fact of the BBC showing this programme, I would have been blisfully unaware of the truth about the Christian church. If only I had the foresight to make an informed decision about what I should expose my delicate self to, I might not have been so badly scarred. Perhaps, instead, I should've been in bed with a hot mug of cocoa at 10pm last night.
Yesterday, I saw a spokeswoman from MediaWatch-UK being interviewed by Peter Sissons on BBC News 24. He clearly wasn't having any of it, and you could tell that he really didn't give her argument much credence at all because he was having quite a hard time taking her seriously. E.g.
"So you admit you haven't seen it."
"No, I haven't seen it."
"Don't you think perhaps you should see it before you pass judgment on it?"
"If something is poisonous, you don't eat it to make sure it's poison."
which was really quite amusing.
Granted, she does have a point, and it's a rather complex one that cannot be distilled during a quick interview, but it's worth noting that at that point, it really looked like Mr. Sissons was about to give up.
One of her other arguments was that Children (someone has evidently thought of them) might see it. Mr. Sissons pointed out that perhaps Children might not be watching television at 10pm (for some reason, I am also of the opinion that perhaps parents might exert some sort of responsibility and discretion), but this woman has obviously accurately gauged the moral decline of the country, because she asserted the opinion that even if a child had not seen the show, she would undoubtedly be speaking to someone in the playground on Monday morning who had. Which rather lends me to believe that either all television at all times is suitable for children, or children should be fitted with off-switches. I suspect that there are some parents who may, at times, be quite grateful should the latter ever become a realistic option.
Perhaps instead we should medicate all children. There can't be that many of them. On the other hand, I suspect that there are enough blunt instruments in British households to ensure that a national Blinding Day could be quite successful.
I shall refrain from making any comparison between the controversy surrounding this screening and the production of Bezhti in Birmingham.
Oh, Tom has something to say about this, too.
 http://www.christianvoice.org.uk/ - I had to stop reading this after a while because it was making me angry, and you wouldn't like me when I'm angry.
10 comments and trackbacks