It may not be a terribly fashionable thing to say, but I LIKE the first series of Blackadder.
I don't just find it watchable, or an okay way to pass half an hour (or 33-odd minutes) of my time. I really like it. I admire it. No, no, I adore it.
It's always been the outcast son, the pariah, the black sheep of the Blackadder clan; people write it off as 'too big', or else they say they don't like the voice that Rowan Atkinson gives his character in that initial series, or else they just say, 'Well, it's just not as funny as the other series, is it?'
True. I'll second that. It isn't as funny as the second series, or the third series, and definitely nowhere near as ball-crunchingly hilarious as the fourth and final series. (But then, what is?) But then lots of comedies are well liked - indeed, loved - when they are not particularly funny. Friends, for example. Oh, how I've tried and tried to come to terms with Friends. I've tried to like it, I really have. I've sat down with others and watched entire episodes in the hope that I would find something funny, or like the characters, or like the absurd situations in which the characters find themselves ... anything, a foot in the door, a way in to discovering what it is about it that other people obviously love so much. But I've failed. I know, I'm rubbish. Evidently I am. But that's just the way it is. I cannot make myself like Friends, or The Mighty Boosh, or Russell Howard, or Russell Brand, or Russell Kane, or Russell Gekko, or whoever the new twenty-something unfunny lad from Essex or Dorset or Surrey or wherever whose name is Russell happens to be. Just as I cannot convince most people I know - even diehard Blackadder fans - to like the first series of one of the most celebrated sitcoms ever produced.
Hardly surprising. I'm not even sure I could convince myself of why I love it so much. Perhaps it's the thirteen-year-old boy in me (hold those lame paedophile-cum-catamite jokes right there please), who sat down having bought his first ever video one day in 1996, and who discovered six whole episodes of a series of his favourite comedy which he'd never seen before, no, not so much as a five-second clip (this was, of course, the days before Youtube, and even the days before clip shows and Top 100 countdown compilation programmes became popular). Maybe it's just nostalgia, a return to the native land of pain (what 'nostalgia' literally means, sort of). Maybe. Or maybe it's something slightly perverse in me, akin to George Bernard Shaw's slightly twisted admiration for All's Well That Ends Well (hardly a classic Shakespeare play).
So perhaps that's it. Perhaps The Black Adder (1983) is my All's Well That Ends Well. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.
But whatever it is, something about it charms me. I like the Middle Ages, and I like the 1980s, and that slightly outdated 80s charm of the studio set trying to recreate a fifteenth-century castle. Perhaps it's the lines that still crack me up, and which, like Shakespeare for the English language as a whole, have entered the common currency of my language: 'Well, splendid!', 'I thought we all were', 'This enormous nonsense' (a personal personal favourite), and so on. I'll leave it with you, dear reader.
Does anyone else out there love this first series? I'm not even saying I like it more than the other series. Or maybe I am. Hmm... I suppose the best way I can think of framing it right now is that while I know it isn't the best series of the four, it's my favourite.
I think. I don't know. I surmise. But I still love The Black Adder. Yes. I do. And I'm not ashamed.
You're going to hate me, but with the exception of the Queen of Spain's Beard, I never really got into the first season. However, the theme song is AWESOME, because there are words. I'm probably not really recommending myself by admitting this, but there you have it.
ReplyDeleteHayley! Thanks for the comment :)
ReplyDeleteI think I can forgive you. I'll have to think on it, though... ;)
Seriously (can I be serious? I'll try!), I think that was one of the reasons I chose to write the blog. Even my closest friends who love Blackadder to the marrow of their being don't get on with the first series, because of the reasons outlined above. I think it is a bit perverse of me to like it, much as it is perverse of me to prefer Robert E. Howard to JRR Tolkien (I dreamt I wrote Lord of the Rings, but I was just Tolkien in my sleep, ba-dum) in terms of fantasy authors. Maybe I'm just one big dollop of perversity!
At one stage I think I would've even gone so far as to say that while the fourth series is undoubtedly the best, my favourite series is the first. But not now. I do love the first series, but I'd place the fourth series at the top in terms of my appreciation. After that, I think my head would fall off if I tried to work out what would come next...
Think it's mainly nostalgia though. Whenever I watch it, I'm a wide-eyed thirteen year-old again. And yet, despite that, I still love it ;)
Firstly, I'm thoroughly ambivalent about Tolkien. I love The Hobbit with an all-consuming passion. It was one of the first adult books I read when I was a kid and it's one of the books that continues to inspire me as a writer. The Lord of the Rings, however, was one big snooze-fest. I was terribly disappointed.
ReplyDeleteThe fourth series is my favourite too. My head, however, remains firmly attached, as I love the series in descending numerical order. (And yes, I actually worked that out.)
Have you read any of Ben Elton's fiction writing? And how do you feel about Richard Curtis' film offerings?
Yes, Lord of the Rings was a turgid custard pie of self-important sub-biblical language and pixieshit drivel, and its importance in the rise of fantasy has been hugely overplayed. (IMUO: in my 'umble opinion.)
ReplyDeleteI'm faintly envious that you're able to put all four series in descending numerical order without your head falling off. I think, on a day when I'm thinking particularly clearly, I'd agree with the descending numerical thing. But something about that first series eats away at me like a mouse through an old cloth. And on an unclear day, it's up there with the fourth series for me. I'm perverse. I'm kinky. I'm not sure it should even be allowed. I shall flagellate myself for it tonight!
I've not read any of Elton's novels - are they good? A friend of mine has read one or two: he recommended the one about reality TV whose title currently escapes me, but I've never actually sought it out. (I tend to do my reading largely on the basis of what happens to fall into my hands in charity shops and second-hand bookstores.)
As for Curtis, call me a soppy girl (again), but I enjoyed 'Four Weddings', thought *Notting Hill* was a sweet film with funny moments, and *Love Actually* the same (especially the bits with Andrew Lincoln and whatsherface, the girl in Pirates of the Caribbean). What are your opinions/recommendations in terms of Elton's and Curtis' solo efforts?
PS I heard somewhere that there's a Bernard in everything Curtis writes (including Blackadder II and Blackadder Goes Forth, but also Four Weddings, Notting Hill, and probably Love Actually too) because an ex-girlfriend of his left him years ago for a man called Bernard. (Whether the man was anything like Nursie, I couldn't say!)
Wow. Tell me what you really think about LOtR. I think that its role in the rise of fantasy fiction is debatable. As one of the first, it was bound to merit a certain amount of importance. However, the whole concept of epic, good vs. evil battle is a hallmark of traditional fantasy (my least favourite type of fantasy, in case you're interested). There has been a definite shift away from the whole "epic" fantasy angle. Urban fantasy (traditional fantasy devices in a contemporary setting) has become hugely popular, especially with women. There is little to no Tolkienian (is that a word?) influence that I can see. Besides, we all know that Tolkien ripped off Norse mythology. I mean, come on. Middle Earth is a direct translation of the Norse Midgard.
ReplyDeleteBut moving on...
The Elton book to which you refer is "Dead Famous". Coincidentally, the only one I own. (Also picked up at a second-hand bookstore. That is spooky, sir.) It doesn't require much in way of serious thought, but it is highly enjoyable. I've also read "The First Casualty" which I felt was rather long-winded and boring. I think it was his attempt to write serious fiction as opposed to light and fluffy "beach-read" type fiction.
I've read your blog on love. Either you're a girl or you think too much. I'll let you decide which. I enjoyed "Four Weddings and a Funeral", although I haven't watched it for years. I hated "Notting Hill". "Love Actually" was OK. My dad LOVED it and made me watch it. I felt that it was contrived- I think he tried too hard to make a feel-good movie in time for the holidays. However, I loved Rowan Atkinson as the shop assistant.
I'll say this now- if my boyfriend dumped me for some girl, I sure as hell wouldn't immortalise him in every piece of fiction I write. Am I alone in that thinking?
Yes, yes, and an enormous YES to all you said about Lord of the Rings. To be honest, when I heard Tolkien had created the novel as a sort of ancillary project to creating the language, I thought: no, you don't say. Deary deary me. You're right - epic fantasy, although a recent genre in terms of its being labelled such, is as old as literature itself: *Paradise Lost*, *Sir Gawain and the Green Knight*, *The Odyssey* - all of these contain elements of modern fantasy. I don't know much about urban fantasy - I hear China Mieville's rather good, though - so any writers you could recommend from your own reading would be super :)
ReplyDeleteThanks for reading the love blog. I think I do think about things too much, but I may also be a bit of a girl. The deep voice and, er, other masculine features fool no one! But I'm very happy to be able to say that I wrote that blog when I was 'in a darker place' (to use that old phrase), and I'm now much better. Better than I've been in a long time, in fact. Sorry, I shall stop rubbing my smug, self-satisfied face metaphorically into yours now.
I think you're right about the Bernard thing though. Maybe there was just something about the name. There IS something about the name. 'Some chap I bumped into the mess the other day called John' wouldn't have had the same ring. God bless all Bernards of the world! (Was going to do a feeble 'Saint' Bernard joke there, but, look, I desisted.)
Urban fantasy, by its very nature, is geared towards female readers. For the most part, the protagonist is female (usually tough as nails) and sex features frequently (although it isn't a requirement). If you're really interested in the genre, I would suggest "Rosemary and Rue" by Seanan McGuire and "Nightlife" by Rob Thurman. I'm not sure how readily available those books are in the UK, but they're both excellent (and Nightlife is told from the viewpoint of a male protagonist). The other series I would recommend is "The Dresden Files" by Jim Butcher. The first book in that series is "Storm Front." While the "Temeraire" series by Naomi Novik is not urban fantasy, I HIGHLY recommend that you read it. It is an alternate history series during the Napoleonic wars with an aerial corps both in France and England mounted on dragons. Interesting, well-written, beautifully detailed, and highly compelling reading. For vampires, I prefer more traditional vampires, so I tend to stick with the first 4 books of "The Vampire Chronicles" by Anne Rice, although "The Southern Vampire Mysteries" by Charlaine Harris are truly excellent.
ReplyDelete