The BBC redoubles its efforts to get rid of whitey.

What the BBC thinks of its white, elderly middle class audience.

After ignoring several scary warnings about what I was to see, it was pleasantly surprising to find myself enjoying The Singapore Grip, a new Sunday night series on ITV. I hardly ever watch TV drama anymore, certainly not from the BBC who recently trashed Howard’s End, and can no longer be trusted anywhere near Dickens.

Recent BBC attempts at period drama have been like listening to an orchestra not only flay a favourite piece of music but change the tune out of all recognition. This is no accident. Piers Wenger, Head of BBC drama, who gave us a black Mrs Cratchit in, A Christmas Carol, wants every second poke bonnet on screen to have a black face poking out from under it, and proudly rejects the idea that there’s any need to adapt literary texts ‘faithfully.’

This six- part ITV production of the 1979 novel by Booker Prize winner JG Farrell, seemed to respect the novel and its author rather than distort the work to score woke political points or adjust it to fit contemporary political correctness.

Farrell was anti-colonialist and we were presented with a rather unpleasant group of white fat-cats with no idea they are about to become the starving slaves of the Japanese. Their ugly colonial snobbery and reckless ineptitude were shown with a satirical light touch, gradually revealing how their folly is leading to a collapse Churchill called, the ‘Worst disaster and largest capitulation in British history.’

We see the military situation handled lamentably by Major General Percival, played by Richard Lumsden, the man who’d also been in charge of the ‘Black and Tans’ fiasco in Ireland. This was all set against a glorious sound track from the 1940s, not the usual intrusive soaring violins now common in TV drama to ensure the right level of emotion in the putative international audience.

My satisfaction at this Sunday night delight was short lived as I made the mistake of looking at Twitter and found a cold shower of hatred against the series. Tweets roughly divided into people no longer familiar with serious TV drama complaining that it ‘Wasn’t like Downton.’

They were baffled by the ‘flat script,’ by Sir Christopher Hampton, unable to cope with anything oblique. Another said it was, ‘boringly well- acted.’ Possibly meaning nuanced. The rest, the majority knew nothing about the British Empire except that they hated it, and if any aspect is being shown on TV using white people it must be ‘racist.’

One of the most vituperative was Daniel York, a half-Chinese actor, who recently added ‘Loh,’ to his name. In March he resigned from the Actors’ Union Race Equality Committee after they were forced to apologise for Twitter attacks on Laurence Fox who’d insisted on BBC Question Time that Britain is a, ‘tolerant, lovely country.’

York later referred to the issue as, ‘Just a bun fight between privileged white people with money.’

It seems that his opinion has held sway as on Sept 14th Paul W Fleming, the new secretary of Equity, the son of a union activist in the car industry, who calls himself, ‘The first openly LGBTQ+ General Secretary of any union,’ and promises a ‘radically different future for the industry,’ has issued an apology to members of the Race Equality Committee who resigned over the apology to Fox.

This Sunday, unable to stomach a drama focussed on wealthy white people York accused the ITV series of, ‘Erasing the east Asian population.’

The media group BEATS, (British East and Southeast Asian non-profit media advocacy group) decried the show’s, ‘harmful non-representation of Asians,’ calling it, ‘deeply upsetting.’

‘In a landscape where the Black Lives Matter movement,’ they added, ‘has placed this country’s problematic view of its own colonial legacy firmly under the microscope, an expensively mounted TV adaptation of J.G. Farrell’s satirical novel, with colonial Singapore as its exotic backdrop, is a kick in the teeth to the U.K.’s East and Southeast Asian community. This is especially concerning at a time when anti-East and Southeast Asian hate crime has dramatically increased during the coronavirus pandemic.’ They also deemed Farrell’s satire, ‘fatally undermined by its 1970s race and gender mores.’

Back then we could laugh at ourselves as ex-British colonialists but strangely even that white self-criticism is now forbidden. Worse, the BBC are involved in attacking the series, whether out of jealousy or genuine woke commitment is not clear. They gave Daniel Loh a platform on Radio 4’s Front Row before the series began.

‘A cosy post-colonial story,’ said a review in the Telegraph by Anita Singh. She didn’t explain how it was ‘post-colonial’ despite being set in a time when the British Empire was still fully intact, but it’s the thought that counts and hers was disgusted at its, ‘half- hearted attempts at diversity.’

‘In context’ as they say on the Left, even when the BBC showed an all Asian cast in a drama earlier this year, Guardian critic, Chitra Ramaswamy, complained, ‘It’s ground-breaking in its casting yet Andrew Davies’s adaptation of Vikram Seth’s to me still feels uncomfortably old-school. This may be the first Indian period drama of its kind in British TV history but  remains an India that a British audience is used to seeing.’Not only can British people not appear in a series, their viewing ability is suspect too.  

ITV’s attempt to adapt a novel as it was written by its author is under severe attack. As the story is about the British Empire, white people who created the reviled thing, are no longer allowed to be central to the story.

Farrell is attacked for not writing more about Asian people, but if he had he would surely be attacked for ‘cultural appropriation.’ According to the rules of woke, now espoused by the BBC, men and women cannot write about each other and white people of either sex cannot write about, impersonate or even wear the same hair-style as black or brown people.

The BBC is wilfully committing suicide for the sake of its obsession with a racist, undemocratic ideology. If ITV are brow-beaten enough over this series, I’m worried that I’ll never get to see a satisfactory Sunday night drama again. Perhaps that doesn’t matter greatly, but why should anyone who wants to watch TV be deprived of inspiring rather than irritating adaptations of good literature, treated instead to an endless stream of propaganda which deliberately distorts the truth about Britain’s history, people and culture?

The situation of both channels sent me to bed very sadly.

Subscribe to the quarterly print magazine

Subscribe to the quarterly digital magazine

 Where did you hear about the Salisbury Review?

Editor’s note: Read this disgusting parade of fifth rate talent hired by the BBC and ask yourself. Should I pay the BBC TV licence?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

16 Comments on The BBC redoubles its efforts to get rid of whitey.

  1. Add to that Sue Barker and co, shoved ignominiously off our screens for the heinous crime in BBC parlance of being of middle-aged and the incorrect ethnicity in favour of younger presenters of the ‘correct’ ethnicity. As if the vast majority of people can’t see through it all.

  2. As ever, a measured commentary and perceptive insight from Jane Kelly.

    At 58 years of age, and pale hue, I am firmly one of the tribe reviled by the Jeremy’s and Tristram of “wokerati.“ Accordingly, I no longer watch TV and stick to reading Trollope and TS Eliot. Life is so much better.

  3. I agree it is all very depressing and extremely worrying.

    However, I cannot help but think that the ‘woke’ position is so unnatural and so impossible, that it will ultimately implode.

    It is important to realise, even in the midst of their worst attempts at shaming and hating the non-woke out of existence, that there is nothing ‘enlightened’ about their ideology.

    It is purely an attempt to seize power, using the incredibly effective weapon of emotional abuse on a huge scale.

    We must get our own minds straight about what their game is. We must move on from always considering meekly whether their complaints are valid. They’re not.

    And never forget that we have as much right to shape our lives in our way as anyone.

  4. Someone of a “conspiratioral” bent might suspect that the blatant numerical domination of TV adverts and several recently made programmes, by (to use their own phraseology) “people who look like” a section of the population registered at less than 5% at the last census, is preparing the rest of us for a future society (“nation” is the wrong term), in which this “Black” %age is many times greater.

  5. Don’t pay the BBC licence fee like tens of thousands of other pensioners. On the other hand if you approve of the Dover landings, 5000 so called refugees this year, get out your credit card. Gary will be only too happy to take your widow’s mite.

  6. The Far East was at the bottom of the list for talent & equipment. Aircraft had to have SNAKE painted on their fuselages to prevent them being borrowed en route for N Africa or Italy. The super-annuated Brooke-Popham and the hopeless but well-connected Duff Cooper. The Royal Navy wanted to act independently from its Naval Base so didn’t liaise with the Army & RAF. It lacked a fleet for Singapore. Percival pointed out the deficiencies of the defence of Malaya & Sigapore against Japan in 1937 but nothing was done because there was never enough to go around. In true Imperial fashion the impossible was ignored.

  7. Yes well.

    Add it all up, and what do we find?

    Just that Asians, blacks and Muslims from everywhere have been nett beneficiaries of Western Civ generally, and of the period of the British Empire in particular.

    Beneficiaries they are, big-time.

    And this is obvious, and the obvious must be said, again and again.

    Just that the interim aim of Asians, blacks and Muslims from everywhere, and their white, marxist-inspired, power-seeking supporters, funders and manipulators, is to eliminate freedom of speech, for obvious reasons, on their way to full takeover of the West.

    Non-marxist whites!

    Thinking caps on, alright?

    And devise and implement counter-campaigns.

    And be quick about it, alright, as time is tight.

  8. I gave up all T.V. reception some six or so years ago and I can’t say that I have regretted it. I have a T.V. but for watching my DVD/VHS library. Films from the 1930s – 1960s are generally my preferred choice but selected films from the 70s (dwindling as the years proceed) are still 5* including Russian and Czech. The programs I recorded in the 1970s/’80s on VHS are a treasure such as the much lamented ‘Wednesday Play’ on BBC. I cherish my VHS recording of a David Mercer play ‘Shooting the Chandelier’ with Edward Fox and Denholm Elliot; such quality of a playwright and the acting is unsurpassed. I have all but stopped listening to BBC Radio 4 and Any Questions – of which I have selected cassette tape recordings of programs that included such notable figures as – Enoch Powell, Tony Benn, Nigel Farage, Norman Lamont, Frederic Forsyth, Norman Tebbit, Peter Hitchens, David Starkey, and Ann Widecombe – but nobody of their viewpoint is welcome in ‘the green room’ now and so I must look elsewhere and talk-radio has supplanted the ‘Today’ program on Radio 4. I boycotted L.B.C. after they fired Nigel Farage.

    • I gave up television in 1969, and radio in the 80s. I have a lot more time now for productive pursuits. I gave them up because I was too busy, and nobody in my crowd watched TV. If I was still a watcher I would give it up because of wokeness, humour being no more than disguised political venom plus colour-blind casting. I know what’s going on because of sites such as this and links supplied to on-line video.

    • Look out for ‘Talking Pictures’, dedicated to film history, which though it is forced to preface each old movie with a public health warning, otherwise shows everything and anything – even the magnificent Gumshoe of 1971 with Albert Finney, which is so politically incorrect it is off the scale. Always a danger of wallowing in nostalgia, but it reminds us of what we once had. I think the channel is danger of becoming a cult.

  9. ‘’ white people of either sex cannot write about, impersonate or even wear the same hair-style as black or brown people.’’

    We have had a black Achilles from the BBC; a ‘Black’ Joan of Arc, a ‘person of colour’ as a character in Robin Hood’s merry band, black faces pop up prominently here and there in historical drama, such as in the recent series on Queen Victoria, black people play eighteenth century aristocrats on stage ……there really does seem to be an agenda here.

    The leftists who lie about European history in this fashion really do seem to want to write European people out of it, or at least filch it from them to such an extent as to destroy their identity.

    Imagine the furore nowadays if Martin Luther King, or Mandela or Shaka Zulu or any African or Asian were to be portrayed as White. But hey! Say what you please about White characters. If White people object they are ‘racist’.

    • a “Black” Joan of Arc…

      The BBC production might actually have been historically accurate, but only if Joan was portrayed as black after being burned to a crisp (twice, apparently) by the English!

  10. I was enjoying a lovely cup of tea with ones wife after a pleasing enough walk, and she suitably ruins it by telling me, via her iPad, just HOW much a X amount of folk ‘presenting’ on TV and Radio of the BBC in wages, per person.
    Not a lot new with that then is it?
    And what can we do about it then, besides being disgusted? NOT A LOT?