Comedy Awards 2011: Post-Match Analysis

I have to analyse the events of last night’s British Comedy Awards because for the most part I seemed to do quite poorly.

The most important news is that I horrendously lost the penny gamble. It was going very well, as we had a huge roll-over from many un-won rounds, only for the brilliantly understated “Twenty Twelve” to help me scoop the pot.

Trouble is that traditionally the last award is a chance for the stragglers to play catch-up (especially when they are in such a sulk as was the first-born!) so the penny bets are scratched and everyone places as much as they choose on the closer. Were I in a better frame of mind, I’d have done some sums and worked out how much to gamble to ensure I still won, but both girls went all-in; I doubt I would have stood a chance regardless. Horrible Histories being given the sketch show award for a second year sealed my non-winning fate. On the plus side, I did not come last; but as we know, in award shows there are only winners and losers: second place counts for nothing.

So the home-bound competition dealt with, what of the awards themselves?

I am not going to analyse each decision, because I did enough thinking when making my predictions. For the most part, I felt even those awards going against my hopes and expectations went nevertheless to deserving people, so I won’t be harping on about “Why the hell?” but I do have a few things to acknowledge…

It was amazing to see Armando Iannucci receive an award. Odd it was the Writers Guild award rather than, say, Outstanding contribution or something, because to be honest what he has given the world of British comedy is beyond what he has brought to the table as a writer, but I guess there is time yet for more acknowledgment. It is quite simple to see when looking at the array of comedy around right now just how influential Iannucci has been throughout, both in television and radio so to have that recognised in any form is amazing.

On the converse, I did find the choice of The Inbetweeners as winners of the Outstanding Contribution to be odd indeed. To have made an outstanding contribution, surely you would have to have influenced others and done something to aid the further development of comedy in general. Whilst a brilliant show, has The Inbetweeners yet had time to do this? Of course, the claim could be that they have contributed the wealth of talent that is (in particular) Greg Davies, Simon Bird and Joe Thomas (and I am aware others have worked on other projects too, but these three especially stand out right now) and as such this is Outstanding Contribution, but would this not be the point of the Best Sitcom award they received last year? In all fairness, there are plenty of shows which have contributed far more over a greater amount of time.

It was brilliant to see Stewart Lee receive the award for the Best TV Comic. I really did not think he would be chosen because of his non-conformist nature; a fact he acknowledged himself in his speech, stating that it discredited his entire career (I am paraphrasing; I am far too lazy for proper reporting). That said, I am overjoyed he won, in spite of the fact I had opted against him (having no faith in the system, see?!)

I found the decision to give the best female comic award to Victoria Wood a strange one. I do wonder how much of that was because of her past contributions rather than just off the back of her new show, especially given that many people had not even heard of her new show least still watched it.

I was sad that Greg Davies did not win the Breakthrough award; although I do think whoever won, I’d have been thoroughly disappointed for the non-winners… and part of me has to wonder whether they were all a little relieved not to have had to deal with the seemingly (in case there is something actually wrong with the guy) drunken antics of Freddie Starr. I have to say, I think Dan Skinner dealt brilliantly with the situation; still managing to make his thank you’s, whilst ushering Starr from the stage.



These awards also highlight something else which really grates at me; being the concept “If it doesn’t happen on TV, it doesn’t exist”.

My regular readers will be [painfully] aware (I do know I can be something of a nag!) that I much prefer radio. I guess it comes of being so obsessed by words rather than by their visual representation, or maybe it is simply down to my constant need to multi-task; whilst listening to the radio I can be writing, taking a bath, cooking dinner etc, whereas TV is more demanding of a person’s time.

Regardless… I am digressing once more…

One day I might decide to start editing out the digressions in order to make this whole blog seem more professional, but since they give a little insight into my thought processes, I wonder if I ought to just leave them… more to ponder on I guess!

So anyway:

Where is all the great radio comedy in these awards? The name implies an all-inclusive tone “The British Comedy Awards”: the awards for the entire comedy industry of Britain… so what of those working their asses off week-on-week on the stand-up circuit? What of writers churning out novels, magazine and newspaper columns, blogs etc which have huge followings and are consistently funny throughout?

I am getting far too deep for so late on a Saturday, but this is not just about the awards; it goes far deeper than that. It does irk me hugely when I tell someone I am going to see a particular comedian, or ask “did you hear X on the radio the other day?” only to meet with blank looks because having not been on a panel show or Live at the Appollo makes this person a no-one. Even more annoying when I reel off credits: wrote this; was on this; did that show with Y: still no response.

Or maybe it is simply more indicative of my fangirl nature that I expect everyone to be the comedy geek I am becoming?

Either way, I feel I have wandered so far from the point now I might need to take out a mortgage to buy a train ticket back, so I guess that is my cue to consider this post finished.


Obviously, the Youtube listing is light on radio shows, but a dig around brought up this Christmas gem from The Unbelievable Truth hosted by the brilliant David Mitchell... for my money one of the best radio panel shows, with a new series due to start at the end of the month.

On Politics...

The life-plan of my oldest daughter has changed once again and she is now aiming to be a politician. She wants it for all the right reasons; like changing the world, ending bad stuff happening to good people, making sure unpleasant people are adequately punished for their actions and so on. This new tack, however, has made me realise just how politically ill-informed her generation truly are.

As I was growing up in the eighties, comedy was highly politically-charged and it was from this comedy that as a teen I gained most of my political education. From the anti-Thatcher rants of Ben Elton, to the almost documentary aspect of Yes Minister and all between, I learned about the inner workings of government, how the parties’ beliefs differed from (or often mirrored) one another and how easy it was for someone to make a stand against a regime one did not agree with.

Sunday evenings were a particularly special time, as I was allowed up beyond my bedtime to watch the fantastic Spitting Image. This show was possibly the most influential political comedy of its time. From the stand-ups and character-based satire of the time, we were drip-fed opinion and told how we should feel about something. The creators of Spitting Image, however, were far cleverer; they almost showed us the politicians just being themselves. But for the hideous puppetry, it could almost have been the original fly-on-the-wall docusoap, thus responsible for all the mind-numbing reality TV which has followed since. Ok, a little extreme, but I am sure you get my point. The show did not make cheap tawdry insults towards its subjects, nor did it seek to belittle simply on the grounds of political leaning; all politicians were targeted in the same way, regardless of party and whilst caricature was a vital part of the puppets’ design, this was not done in a particularly insulting way. From watching this show, I learned who the key politicians of the time were, which roles they held and what the positions entailed. Without this insight, today’s youth are unable to distinguish one politician from another. Case-in-point, I asked my daughter and a couple of her friends who the Chancellor of the Exchequer was and was met with blank looks, whilst asking who presented the budget half knew the right name, the others simply thought it was the Prime Minister.

In thinking about this a while ago, I desperately wanted the show to return. I felt it was so important to my own education that I could not bear the fact that my own children do not have this source. I realised, though, on listening to an interview with Armando Iannucci that it would never work. (I would link to it, because it is relevant to this topic, but unfortunately was on the BBC I-player, so is no longer available) He pointed out that the type of comedy that stemmed from the political situation in the eighties could never exist nowadays because of the lack of political personality. I hadn’t realised before (well, hadn’t thought about it too much, really!) but for the main, today’s government are career politicians, those who have been almost bred especially for the purpose. They do not have opinions of their own, merely ingrained party policies shared by every other member; they do not have quirks or idiosyncrasies, as they are considered a weakness; they do not say anything which has not been written by a team of nine and proof-read by fifteen for fear that something could be taken out of context or might represent another u-turn. Gone are the free-thinking, spirited politicians who can address an issue with the benefit of hindsight and experience, replaced by kids fresh out of university who have been shaped by their junior-party, moulded into the perfect little bundle to spout the same drivel as their predecessors. Time was that the right person leading a party really could change the world, but I have to wonder nowadays if it really matters any more.

So what of the future? Who will be the politicians of tomorrow?

In spite of government claims to the contrary, they will continue to be predominantly from the upper classes, as the lower classes feel for the most part that politics is wholly irrelevant to their own lives. Voter apathy is higher in lower-class areas for this very reason. The masses believe it doesn’t matter who is in power as all parties will screw you over in the end, so don’t think it worth the effort of voting. These people are not going to be looking to a career in politics as they feel that one person can no longer make a difference.