To be shocked that this was ever ok?! Blackface on Little Britain...

[BrexitBingoGenerator]

Hello. I've just been looking at the Daily Mail (sorry) and there is a thing about this. I was genuinely gobsmacked seeing the photo and it's completely offensive. However, at some time in the not-so-distant past, this was seen as mainstream comedy and I remember it being on primetime telly. So a critical mass of people must have thought this was ok? I never really watched little Britain and this sketch in particular made me want to heave, but I think at the time it was rather for its horrible portrayal of women generally. I don't remember outrage over it at the time. But maybe there was? I guess I'm just ashamed that comedy like this could have been screened in my adult lifetime.

@SuckingDieselFella

Ok, for starters, its a well known argument among scholars that relationships with power and authority are essential components of widespread racism. Individual anti-white racial prejudice obviously exists but this doesn't limit opportunities and realisation of potential the way systemic racism does (hence the need for 'power over' relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed). White people are favoured by the 'system' itself as well as it's individual components (e.g. education, health, employment, economy, housing etc.). People who are not white lack representation of their interests within the platforms where power is held and change can be made.

In a western context (I'm not so ignorant to assume I know the nuances of eastern culture) the white race has controlled the avenues and forums of power from both a historical and modern perspective. This is especially effective where there are historic systems still in place which are difficult to abolish or even change to even the playing field (e.g. House of Lords). White people are not discriminated against as a group (again anti-white racial prejudice exists from an individual perspective but not in the wider, societal context). If you believe that white people are victims of racism then you're ignoring the vital relationships between power, authority and oppression. People belonging to minority ethnic groups don't hold the power required to damage the general interests/positions of white people even if they all acted together as one group and took a 'power with' (which doesn't happen as non-white people are not one homogenous group with a single hive mind). They certainly don't have access to the power required to impact policy, legislation or other aspects of civic life. There is a vast racial wealth gap with reinforces the position of white people in power. They have more access to cultural and economic capital, making them more influential to policy makers etc. It's a self perpetuating circle. The power starts with white people so it remains there until something drastic changes.

There is a lot of nuance as there is also class and sex based discrimination but it essentially comes down to the fact that white people have had the advantage for 400+ years. We might all be playing the same game to put it crudely but that head start will never be under threat from the people trying to catch up.

I always thought it was taking the piss out of people who were racist and therefore found that funny.

@Destroyedpeople. YY It takes intelligence , emotional intelligence and insightfulness to do comedy the way Dave Allen did it

Intelligence Walliams does not have.

With a main cast of able bodied, middle class white men?

Spectacularly missing the point of the show there. Like many programmes before and afterwards, the programme is built around two comedians playing numerous parts, and that is an element of its humour. If it depended on going out and recruiting a large cast, it wouldn't have been the same show and, realistically, would never have got off the ground.

You might as well condemn shows like French and Saunders, AbFab and Dinnerladies for being misandrist because they had a main cast made up predominantly of middle class white women.

@BashStreetKid and Catherine Tate, which was also a brilliant comedy show.

Spectacularly missing the point of the show there.

Spectacularly missing the context of the comment in the first place.

I could never really see the attraction of Catherine Tate either tbh.

@agentstarling

How so?

David Walliams thinks he's Roald Dahl.
He really isn't.

I don't understand why Little Britain is seen as being behind the times, and something like the spectacularly dated unfunny humour of Drag Race is seen as progressive. Even if you don't object to drag as being sexist, there's very little intelligent humour in sending up women as 'trollops' and 'sluts', talk about lazy sterotypes there, takes us right back to the 1970s, but of course women are always on the bottom of the pile. Hypocrisy of the highest order. Have black people actually campaigned to have it taken off these platforms? I didn't offend me personally, although I'm understanding if it does others, but I'm curious to know who decided this particular program should be targeted. I think it's a shame if character comedians from now on are only allowed to play people from their own class, race and sex - it's really the death of character comedy, when you think about it.

@Nousernamehistory

Spectacularly missing the point of the show there.

Spectacularly missing the context of the comment in the first place.

Nope. In the context of a two-sentence comment, its fairly and squarely directed at that context.

Nope

The context is important in that it was a response to a comment that implied it was ok to be racist, ableist, classist etc. as no oppressed group was spared the piss taking. The cast lacks any sort of diversity that could possibly explain that bizarre argument.

But ignore the actual narrative, everyone else's words mean what you want them to so things suit better

Although I suppose you could say I miss the point of the entire show since it's absolutely shit

[quote EmpressoftheMundane]This was an interesting short essay by a Professor form Columbia University who happens to be black. It's not a contrarian point of view, but a bit of a call to be rational, not emotional and put black people's needs first rather than getting carried away with white guilt and white people wallowing around.
www.the-american-interest.com/2018/05/24/atonement-as-activism/?fbclid=IwAR3EKCWOy0l5_hO3K_TaBCx3LxQ6-PepAlWZ2W-6BPtkA1IlsbWE7cjPXaA[/quote]
There does seem to be a lot of white self flagellation and guilt going on these days. Not sure ho wit helps BAME persons at all.

@Chiyo666

Being taken the piss out of and being racially abused is very different.

I’m half black and half chinese, and unfortunately I was at school when this came out. Being called Ting Tong for 5 years, and having people shout “Mr Dudwee” every time I walked into a room is horrible and I’m glad this shit is seen as unacceptable now so that my mixed race children don’t have to suffer with as much shit as ive had to.

That is grim @Chiyo666. sorry that happened to you. children can be very cruel.

@IagoWithABlackberry

I never watched much of it, so I've not seen the blackface sketch but surely the point was that the show was, at some point, offensive to everyone. Pretty much every character was an exaggerated caricature, they weren't supposed to be realistic representations of different demographics. For example, if you watch the only gay in the village, do you think "Yes, the intention here is to say that this is how all homosexual men are like." Or "Oh look, they've used common stereotypes of gay men to create a comedic character. Oh wait, that's what they've done with every other character!"

I do concur that this is true. Ann for example is a caricature of someone with a mental health issue/learning disability. No real mental issues present like that. Same with Andy's issues- the voice for example. not a real representation of any known disability at all.

Most Thai women do not fit the mail order bride/oppressed timid stereotype either

@Gwenhwyfar

"The character of Andy for example perpetuates the myth that people routinely fake disability"

It was making a joke of the idea that some people MIGHT do that. It wasn't saying all disabled people are like this. It's a comedy.

True, but real life instances of faking disability are pretty rare. So I never really got the point of that particular character. Unless it is poking fun at the notion that some people have (red top columnists and their readership) that all disabeld people are malingering benefits scroungers. If so, I take back my previous comment.

I don't find a lot of comedy funny, I have a difficult to tickle funny bone.

But I think many people's sense of what is funny has changed a lot in the past 10 years or so. Increasingly I find people don't recognise older shows that were intended to be anti-racist, or anti-sexist, they think somehow they are meant to be taken as read.

The way people talk about blackface has changed as well. The term used to be a lot more specific, it didn't include every instance of theatrical make-up, especially in situations like sketch comedy or places like community theatre were there might be a limited number of people to play roles.

So, no, I don't think I would say that the facts necessarily point to racism, though I think in this case you could make a good argument for bad taste.

Looks like race is going the way of being transgender. People dare not mention it or they are accused of racism or in the case of transgender, transgenderism, that really warms people to the cause
Thankfully we can still talk about sexism.

I dont like David walliams ever since i seen him as a judge on britains got talent when he was taking the piss out of a man who prenounced a word wrong and humilated the poor contestant which then consequently triggered the massive crowd to roar with laughter at the man and it was a form of bullying, humour to me isnt about being cruel to get a laugh, that man may be quite sensitive and that experience may have gave him huge anxiety, it just didnt sit right with me and was mean in my opinion, looking back on the little britain sketches after that, it seems David was not just portraying a character but it seems perhaps found it personally funny to take the piss out of people to get attention, for that reason id say yes the show has had its day

I think the most harsh sketch was the ting tong thing that's pretty bad when you see it now and actually very racist.

I have Chinese and Thai friends I would feel embarrassed to watch it with them.

It was awful at the time and awful now

It's very funny.

If Ting Tong was played by an actual Thai woman and the script was exactly the same, would you still laugh? The joke is that she’s played by English, white Matt Lucas - so you can be as racist as you like. It’s not a satirical take down of multi-cultural Britain, it’s a lazy, racist, punching down, lowest-aiming show.

It is an interesting question whether it would be different if the other races were played by people of that race. I do think it is supposed to be mocking the stereotypes and even the disabled sketch isn’t saying they’re all fakers, to me it is mocking the tabloid narrative that lots of them are pulling a fast one.

If they kept the sketches but removed some of the mimicking other races and made the butt of their jokes men rather than always females, would it be acceptable in the current climate? Some of them would have to go completely, but plenty of the content could be redone in a way that reflects current thinking. Genuinely curious as to whether posters think that would still be offensive.

Some of the funniest sketches were things like the one where the person goes to a shop, asks for something very specific, gets given it and still doesn’t want it as it isn’t specific enough. That type of sketch mocks nobody.