Hungry? C4 to create comedy series...about the famine

Micky Dolenz

Jawgap wrote: »

You mean prime minister?????

Who says I'm British?? And why is my nationality relevant??

For the record, I'm Irish........born here, reared here (and have very represented my country abroad on an occasion or two)


.......I also have certain quals / experience in history, archives and research.....

Whats with all the question marks?.

To be honest, I more interested in how you represented Ireland, that's pretty cool. You don't need to go into detail, sporty or non sporty.

Jawgap

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Whats with all the question marks?.

To be honest, I more interested in how you represented Ireland, that's pretty cool. You don't need to go into detail, sporty or non sporty.

The question marks express bemusement.......

My name is URL

Jawgap wrote: »

As I already pointed put earlier - from 1846 through 1850, more food was imported into the country than exported.

If the Government really wanted to exterminate the population why allow an amount equivalent to 50% of the island's food production to be imported????

They may not have wanted to exterminate the population but are you denying that efforts were made to keep the population down.. and I don't just mean in terms of numbers.

Why was Charles Trevelyan given the position of administrating relief in Ireland, while he himself was openly anti-Irish and made numerous genocidal remarks about Irish people?

And who was getting the food being imported into Ireland? Did most of it not go to land owners who were in cahoots with the British?

Billy86

Esther Obedient Numeral wrote: »

If it turns out to be brilliant satire then fair enough, something akin to Siegfried Sassoon's poems and critics of World War 1.

Modern TV likes to keep things dumbed down though so I'm not holding my breath.

Depending on what you're watching, really - modern TV is also making some of the smartest and best stuff in it's entire history.

But yeah, depends entirely on how they approach and execute it.

Micky Dolenz

Jawgap wrote: »

The question marks express bemusement.......

Do the ........... also express it, by chance?

so come on, sporty or non sporty?

MadsL

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Do the ........... also express it, by chance?

so come on, sporty or non sporty?

Do I get a response or do you just want to discuss punctuation instead?

I'm easy. !@#$%^&*()

Ghost Buster

Anyone see The Ringer. A COMEDY about a failed athlete pretending to be mentally handicapped so he could compete in the special Olympics? There was outrage at the very idea but The Special Olympics ended up endorsing it.
why can similar not happen with this?

Jawgap

My name is URL wrote: »

They may not have wanted to exterminate the population but are you denying that efforts were made to keep the population down.. and I don't just mean in terms of numbers.

Why was Charles Trevelyan given the position of administrating relief in Ireland, while he himself was openly anti-Irish and made numerous genocidal remarks about Irish people?

There's a very long thread discussing this in the History forum......I suggest reading that.

If you can't be bothered, then the short version is that the policies imposed, as brutal as they seem today, were the product of the scientific, religious and cultural ideas of the time, not to mention that political economy as a discipline was in its infancy....

For there to have been a 'genocide' (a concept that didn't exist then) there would have to be intent - where was the intent?

Also why go to the trouble of destroying the backyard breadbasket of the empire and eliminating a population that was providing over 40% of the imperial army manpower and about a fifth of the Royal Navy? What was the motive?

And if extermination was the goal why allow so much food to be imported?

Micky Dolenz

MadsL wrote: »

Do I get a response or do you just want to discuss punctuation instead?

I'm easy. !@#$%^&*()

How easy?

I thought I answered you earlier.

Jawgap

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Do the ........... also express it, by chance?

so come on, sporty or non sporty?

I think you are trying to deflect.....I'm not particularly interested in facilitating that.

Micky Dolenz

Jawgap wrote: »

There's a very long thread discussing this in the History forum......I suggest reading that.

If you can't be bothered, then the short version is that the policies imposed, as brutal as they seem today, were the product of the scientific, religious and cultural ideas of the time, not to mention that political economy as a discipline was in its infancy....

For there to have been a 'genocide' (a concept that didn't exist then) there would have to be intent - where was the intent?

Also why go to the trouble of destroying the backyard breadbasket of the empire and eliminating a population that was providing over 40% of the imperial army manpower and about a fifth of the Royal Navy? What was the motive?

And if extermination was the goal why allow so much food to be imported?

I don't think anyone suggests genocide, but we were certainly the unruly part of the colony and we were oppressed and the situation was taken advantage of.

why did Tony Blair say what he said?

Micky Dolenz

Jawgap wrote: »

I think you are trying to deflect.....I'm not particularly interested in facilitating that.

Heh, I'm not one to deflect, good Sir.

I'm going to guess non sporty so.

MadsL

My name is URL wrote: »

They may not have wanted to exterminate the population but are you denying that efforts were made to keep the population down.. and I don't just mean in terms of numbers.

What is your evidence for this intention?

Why was Charles Trevelyan given the position of administrating relief in Ireland, while he himself was openly anti-Irish and made numerous genocidal remarks about Irish people?

Generally a mistake to let Civil Servants set policy.

And who was getting the food being imported into Ireland? Did most of it not go to land owners who were in cahoots with the British?

100,000 pounds worth of cornmeal was imported and distributed in 1845, too late due to bad weather, and too indigestable due to unfamiliarity with how to cook it. I doubt that first wave of assistance went to landowners.

MadsL

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I thought I answered you earlier.

Nope. I asked a very direct question. I'll repeat it for the third time.

Do you believe failing to give money for famine relief is an act of homicide?

Micky Dolenz

MadsL wrote: »

Nope. I asked a very direct question. I'll repeat it for the third time.

Do you believe failing to give money for famine relief is an act of homicide?

Yes I do.

PM Tony Blair agrees.

MadsL

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Yes I do.

PM Tony Blair agrees.

Did you give much to Somalia this year?

Be honest, have you donated to every famine appeal, if not, do you consider yourself a murderer then?

um7y1h83ge06nx

I think that question is a little broad, it would be more accurate to say "failure to give famine relief TO IT'S OWN CITIZENS" (sorry, can't bold on the phone)

At the time we were citizens of the British Empire and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

Micky Dolenz

MadsL wrote: »

Did you give much to Somalia this year?

Be honest, have you donated to every famine appeal, if not, do you consider yourself a murderer then?

Wha? are you off your head?

I am not in control of government spending. so anything I do as an individual is irrelevant. weird line of questioning in fairness.

the British Prime Minister of the day, made a statement about the Great Famine. what are your thoughts on that?

MadsL

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I don't think anyone suggests genocide, ?

Hang on. You just did in your last post.

Either it was intentional or unintentional, which is it?

MadsL

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Wha? are you off your head?

I am not in control of government spending. so anything I do as an individual is irrelevant.

Much the same could have been said by British subjects of the day...

Micky Dolenz

MadsL wrote: »

Hang on. You just did in your last post.

Either it was intentional or unintentional, which is it?

where?

Micky Dolenz

MadsL wrote: »

Much the same could have been said by British subjects of the day...

How so?

MadsL

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

where?

MadsL wrote: »

Do you believe failing to give money for famine relief is an act of homicide?

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Yes I do.

PM Tony Blair agrees.

So if failing to relieve famine is an act of homicide, on a mass scale it is genocide?

Or am I getting you all confused and that's not what you meant to say at all.

Jawgap

Esther Obedient Numeral wrote: »

I think that question is a little broad, it would be more accurate to say "failure to give famine relief TO IT'S OWN CITIZENS" (sorry, can't bold on the phone)

At the time we were citizens of the British Empire and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

That, and the provision of the wrong kind of relief - strange as it may seem, the prevailing thinking at the time was against charity, hence the tendency towards relief work schemes - of course, if you're going to work, you need energy in the form of food.

Charitable relief (direct aid) was not as prevalent as it should've been, and even when it was provided it failed to take account of the local situation - the corn is a good example, people didn't like it because they weren't familiar with it and because they couldn't cook it.

MadsL

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

How so?

If you are not responsible for famine in Somaila in 2014, was the average joe soap living in Leeds in 1845 responsible for the famine in Ireland?

um7y1h83ge06nx

MadsL wrote: »

If you are not responsible for famine in Somaila in 2014, was the average joe soap living in Leeds in 1845 responsible for the famine in Ireland?

Not the average Joe but the British government was as the people living in Ireland were their citizens.

Micky Dolenz

MadsL wrote: »

So if failing to relieve famine is an act of homicide, on a mass scale it is genocide?

Or am I getting you all confused and that's not what you meant to say at all.

Yeep, looks like you are getting confused,

MadsL wrote: »

If you are not responsible for famine in Somaila in 2014, was the average joe soap living in Leeds in 1845 responsible for the famine in Ireland?

I never alluded to that. It was an issue with the government of the day not the joe/jane on the street. that was never my argument.


Let me repeat my direct question to you again, you seem to be avoiding it.

Why did PM Tony Blair apologies for the Great Famine?

MadsL

Esther Obedient Numeral wrote: »

Not the average Joe but the British government was as the people living in Ireland were their citizens.

You mean subjects. As were the British people themselves, subjects of the Crown.

Half the world was part of the British Empire at this point.

edit:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Nationality_Act_1948
The status of a British Citizen did not exist until 1948

MadsL

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Yeep, looks like you are getting confused,

I never alluded to that. It was an issue with the government of the day not the joe/jane on the street. that was never my argument.

Oh I see. You never said that failing to relieve famine was an act of homicide, even though I quoted you. Perhaps you could go back an edit what you said, since you never said it.

Let me repeat my direct question to you again, you seem to be avoiding it.

Why did PM Tony Blair apologies for the Great Famine?

Not avoiding it, just wondering why I am answerable for Tony Blair's actions. I didn't vote for him. Anyway, he's a lawyer not a historian.


So to clarify, you believe who exactly is culpable of homicide? Trevelyan perhaps? Anyone else?

um7y1h83ge06nx

That is true, the British Empire was huge by then, but that does not abdicate responsibility, or at least responsibility by modern standards.

Although governments of powerful countries back then were so right wing and brutal they make Hitler look like a child throwing a tantrum.

Would they have done more if a famine broke out in Liverpool, Manchester or Newcastle?

Fratton Fred

Esther Obedient Numeral wrote: »

Would they have done more if a famine broke out in Liverpool, Manchester or Newcastle?

The government? Probably not, but the people of those cities were most likely working in factories so of more importance to the wealthy and therefore more likely to receive aid locally.

Jawgap

Esther Obedient Numeral wrote: »

That is true, the British Empire was huge by then, but that does not abdicate responsibility, or at least responsibility by modern standards.

Although governments of powerful countries back then were so right wing and brutal they make Hitler look like a child throwing a tantrum.

Would they have done more if a famine broke out in Liverpool, Manchester or Newcastle?

Probably done exactly the same - Trevelyan and the establishment were driven by a dogma based on the theories of Adam Smith - there's no reason to suppose they would have departed from that dogma if events had occurred closer to London.

He, and his cohorts, were like the Troika - they saw a crisis as an opportunity to ram home their ideas as to what the solution should be - perhaps there's some comedic value to be extracted from that?

MadsL

Esther Obedient Numeral wrote: »

That is true, the British Empire was huge by then, but that does not abdicate responsibility, or at least responsibility by modern standards.

People in 1845 should be held accountable by 2014 standards, err..OK. Dig 'em up and throw them in jail then.

Although governments of powerful countries back then were so right wing and brutal they make Hitler look like a child throwing a tantrum.

But they should have shown the compassion of Mother Theresa to starving farm labourers...

Would they have done more if a famine broke out in Liverpool, Manchester or Newcastle?

Have you any idea what life was like for children working in the cotton mills of Manchester, the mines of Newcastle or the port of Liverpool??

This was hardly a compassionate era.

Hidalgo

Jawgap wrote: »

That, and the provision of the wrong kind of relief - strange as it may seem, the prevailing thinking at the time was against charity, hence the tendency towards relief work schemes - of course, if you're going to work, you need energy in the form of food.

Charitable relief (direct aid) was not as prevalent as it should've been, and even when it was provided it failed to take account of the local situation - the corn is a good example, people didn't like it because they weren't familiar with it and because they couldn't cook it.

There were two main problems with the corn.
One as you state, people didn't know how to cook it and
Two. Mild weather meant poor drying which resulted in less quality and quantity of turf. In turn this made it harder to light hot as opposed to smouldering fires needed to cook the corn.

Micky Dolenz

MadsL wrote: »

Oh I see. You never said that failing to relieve famine was an act of homicide, even though I quoted you. Perhaps you could go back an edit what you said, since you never said it.



Not avoiding it, just wondering why I am answerable for Tony Blair's actions. I didn't vote for him. Anyway, he's a lawyer not a historian.


So to clarify, you believe who exactly is culpable of homicide? Trevelyan perhaps? Anyone else?

I'm not one to go back and edit (smiley face)

He was PM of the British empire. The British government of the day were responsible for the Great Famine. If they acted appropriately it would never have been a famine nor mind a great one.

Circles we go in. Sorry, I can't discuss things with people like you. I don't care on repeating myself ad nauseam

riffmongous

There was also a potato famine in Scotland at the same time I think, which ended in high emigration but nowhere near so much death iirc

MadsL

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

He was PM of the British empire. The British government of the day were responsible for the Great Famine. If they acted appropriately it would never have been a famine nor mind a great one.

Eh? Tony Blair was never PM of "The British Empire" Canada and Australia's PMs may have something to say on that

What would have been appropriate? Do you think modern responses to famine are equally appropriate?

Circles we go in.

No. The circle is me reminding you that you agreed that failing to relieve a famine is a homicide. That, by your own judgement, makes you a murderer.

]Sorry, I can't discuss things with people like you. I don't care on repeating myself ad nauseam

Sorry, the ad you are looking for is ad hominum as indicated by "people like you"

Disappointing really that you cannot follow the logical outcome of calling the famine a deliberate act.

Rhys Essien

mal1 wrote: »

Without being shot, why do some Irish feel so passionate about the famine? It's no longer in living memory, our grandparents weren't even alive to witness it. It's just a part of our history.

If you are native Irish,has it occurred to you that your ancestors somehow survived this forced starvation so you could be here today typing this very question??.

I wont use the word famine cause a famine it was not.

SEPT 23 1989

surrounded by water filled with fish and we went hungry

Panthro

I think whoever has come up with the notion of making a comedy based on the Irish famine is nothing but an inexcusable aul bollocks tbh.
We can make jokes of plenty of things (ie priests on Father Ted) but the fuppin famine? The deaths of our own people?
Ah here, good luck.

BBDBB

Writing comedy is difficult, plenty try, many fail, some really really painfully

Writing comedy about something no one else has tried/dared should be a rich vein of material..........that said the chances are that it will struggle to be funny without simply being offensive for the sake of it

Rhys Essien

Jawgap wrote: »

Also why go to the trouble of destroying the backyard breadbasket of the empire and eliminating a population that was providing over 40% of the imperial army manpower and about a fifth of the Royal Navy? What was the motive?

And if extermination was the goal why allow so much food to be imported?

Jesus talk about contradicting yourself.You are saying we were importing food stuff and you also say we were the breadbasket of the empire.What are ya on about and whats your agenda?

As someone else asked,where was this so called imported food going??

In all my years talking about and researching this topic,you are the only person to say we were importing food when its widely known we were exporting,and things ramped up more during the starvation years.

You seem to be trying to skew Irish history.

Rhys Essien

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

surrounded by water filled with fish and we went hungry

Dont even go there.You would have a bullet between the eyes if you attempted fishing back then.Permits were needed etc.

Mardy Bum

Rhys Essien wrote: »

If you are native Irish,has it occurred to you that your ancestors somehow survived this forced starvation so you could be here today typing this very question??.

I wont use the word famine cause a famine it was not.

Actually demographically those that were effected (by death or emigration) where of the lowest class and by and large that class was totally wiped out of Ireland . Therefore there are only a few who would be directly related to those who died. Also most people died from disease not starvation.

mal1

Rhys Essien wrote: »

If you are native Irish,has it occurred to you that your ancestors somehow survived this forced starvation so you could be here today typing this very question??.

I wont use the word famine cause a famine it was not.

Should I sit here and think about all the various tragic circumstances over the past two millennia and reflect about how lucky i am to be here? Yes, the famine and it's impacts has occurred to me but i can't feel passionate about how my ancestors survived. I'm sure my ancestors overcame more tragic circumstances than the Irish famine , it's history and only a small part of how I came to be here today.

I understand and recognise the famine in the context of Irish history, the suffering is sad but I can't feel passionate about protecting it from the comics in Channel 4. Let them go ahead. Maybe they can cover the Norman invasion in the Second series in the same way Blackadder moved through the centuries.

Rhys Essien

mal1 wrote: »

Should I sit here and think about all the various tragic circumstances over the past two millennia and reflect about how lucky i am to be here? Yes, the famine and it's impacts has occurred to me but i can't feel passionate about how my ancestors survived. I'm sure my ancestors overcame more tragic circumstances than the Irish famine , it's history and only a small part of how I came to be here today.

I understand and recognise the famine in the context of Irish history, the suffering is sad but I can't feel passionate about protecting it from the comics in Channel 4. Let them go ahead. Maybe they can cover the Norman invasion in the Second series in the same way Blackadder moved through the centuries.

Have a small bit of respect,will ya.:rolleyes:

Should they make the 9/11 comedy first.They would in their fcuk.

Pwindedd

Do you know what - you're just not ready. It seems it would suit everyone much better to wail and hand-wring over it all, rather than embrace the humour that inevitably arises from tragic circumstances and possibly bring the story of the famine to a wider audience.

Dear god sometimes I think this island thinks it has the monopoly on misery and suffering - Ya seem to thrive on it.

BBDBB

Rhys Essien wrote: »

Have a small bit of respect,will ya.:rolleyes:

Should they make the 9/11 comedy first.They would in their fcuk.

and call it Faulty Towers?

mal1

Rhys Essien wrote: »

Have a small bit of respect,will ya.:rolleyes:

Should they make the 9/11 comedy first.They would in their fcuk.

Goes to show that you're missing my point. Bit of respect for what victim sitting out there today that survived the famine and is reading After Hours? 9/11 is in living memory. There are victims out there. I might meet them some day.

I do show respect, I'm honest in the sense that because I have no tangible experience then I cannot pretend to feel passionate or protective about the events. I do understand and acknowledge the suffering, that is how I show respect. I will not pretend because I'm Irish that I should feel any different.

By the way, you should watch Four Lions if you think comedy about jihad is off limits.

The Black Oil

lertsnim wrote: »

I can't wait till someone does a comedy series based on the Holocaust.

The Big Oven Theory