Maybe they just love the diversity of it and want to big it up with unmerited praise. Some of the comments on here and elsewhere on it being funny are as worrying as they are puzzling. If this is hilarious what is Fawlty Towers?
Ghosts - Series 1 Page 12
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 22nd May 2019, 12:45 AMMaybe they just love the diversity of it and want to big it up with unmerited praise.
You realize it's not that diverse a show. It's only two black people. In ethnic Top Trumps you wouldn't score that much with it,.
Quote: chipolata @ 22nd May 2019, 11:56 AMYou realize it's not that diverse a show. It's only two black people. In ethnic Top Trumps you wouldn't score that much with it,.
Except, of course, that diversity isn't just about black people: it's also about the inclusion of women, the disabled, LGBGT, Asians, other ethnic minorities and, of course, relationships. It's also about how people are portrayed on television.
Women are plentiful among the cast and there's a man whose head has parted company with his body - that's a pretty significant disability.
However, getting back to ethnicity, if I remember correctly there was an episode in which a group of what appeared to be Boy Scouts were having an archery lesson: there were five boys, three of whom were non-Caucasian (one being black, and two Asian). That's diversity on a truly astonishing scale in an organisation whose white membership has never been less than 95%.
Moreover, when assessing the show's contribution to the diversity initiative, it is also highly significant that the couple who inherited the stately home comprises a white woman with a black husband - a setup which would, in itself, have provided a basis for a controversial "Play for Today" on the BBC of the 1970s. Given that such a married relationship is rare in the UK (only 7% of couples - married or otherwise - are interracial), its inclusion as the basis of the relationship between the two inheritors must be seen as a massive contribution to the diversity initiative.
All in all, therefore, "Ghosts" represents quite a powerful hand in the game of ethnic Top Trumps.
Quote: Rood Eye @ 22nd May 2019, 12:48 PMExcept, of course, that diversity isn't all about black people: it's also about the inclusion of women, the disabled, LGBGT, Asians, other ethnic minorities and, of course, relationships.
Women are plentiful among the cast and there's a man whose head has parted company with his body - that's a pretty significant disability.
However, getting back to ethnicity, if I remember correctly there was an episode in which a group of what appeared to be Boy Scouts were having an archery lesson: there were five boys, three of whom were non-Caucasian (one being black, and two Asian). That's diversity on a truly astonishing scale in an organisation whose white membership has never been less than 95%.
Moreover, when assessing the show's contribution to the diversity initiative, it is also highly significant that the couple who inherited the stately home comprises a white woman with a black husband - a setup which would, in itself, have provided a basis for a controversial "Play for Today" on the BBC of the 1970s. Given that such a married relationship is rare in the UK (only 7% of couples - married or otherwise - are interracial), its inclusion as the basis of the relationship between the two inheritors must be seen as a massive contribution to the diversity initiative.
All in all, therefore, "Ghosts" represents quite a powerful hand in the game of ethnic Top Trumps.
I'm clearly watching TV in the wrong way. I tend to just see characters and how well written and acted they are. Ethnicity is pretty irrelevant to me.
Quote: chipolata @ 22nd May 2019, 1:38 PMI'm clearly watching TV in the wrong way. I tend to just see characters and how well written and acted they are. Ethnicity is pretty irrelevant to me.
Same here.
Quote: chipolata @ 22nd May 2019, 1:38 PMEthnicity is pretty irrelevant to me.
Quote: Old Lady Leg @ 22nd May 2019, 1:57 PMSame here.
I'm sure many other white people would say the same.
There are millions upon millions of white TV viewers in Britain who watch their screens day in, day out, year in, year out, rarely noticing ethnicity and therefore failing to realise the extent to which ethnic minorities are under-represented in TV programming.
Non-white viewers have, on the other hand, been aware since the dawn of TV broadcasting in Britain that ethnic minorities are very much under-represented in TV programming.
The BBC's diversity initiative seeks to redress the balance and to include black, Asian and other ethnic minorities across TV programming in proportions similar to those existing in real-life British society.
"Ghosts" is a good example of the diversity initiative in action.
Quote: Rood Eye @ 22nd May 2019, 3:04 PMI'm sure many other white people would say the same.
There are millions upon millions of white TV viewers in Britain who watch their screens day in, day out, year in, year out, rarely noticing ethnicity and therefore failing to realise the extent to which ethnic minorities are under-represented in TV programming.
Non-white viewers have, on the other hand, been aware since the dawn of TV broadcasting in Britain that ethnic minorities are very much under-represented in TV programming.
The BBC's diversity initiative seeks to redress the balance and to include black, Asian and other ethnic minorities across TV programming in proportions similar to those existing in real-life British society.
"Ghosts" is a good example of the diversity initiative in action.
Firstly...you don't know my background.
Secondly...what a load of crap.
Quote: gb901 @ 21st May 2019, 2:01 PM"As the hilarious series from the people behind Horrible Histories and Yonderland comes to a close" - is this reviewer from the guardian getting a backhander? It was anything but "hilarious"!
It was hilarious!
Quote: Chappers @ 22nd May 2019, 5:46 PMIt was hilarious!
Hilarious in my book is laugh out loud: ghosts was anything but!
Quote: gb901 @ 22nd May 2019, 9:08 PMHilarious in my book is laugh out loud: ghosts was anything but!
Well I did - laugh out loud that is.
I generally enjoyed it.
Occasionally it lost its way and got a bit muddled. Perhaps inevitably it occasionally felt like a children's programme, but I'm not sure that mattered.
The pros definitely outweighed the cons though. It was sometimes very funny. The trouser-less politician and the caveman were comedy standouts for me. I look forward to a second series - I'm sure there will be one.
The diversity 'issue' literally never occurred to me until I went on here. It's irrelevant. Sadly, a few posters on here are (let's not mince words) RACIST and cannot watch anything with a black or Asian cast member without complaining about it. Get over yourselves!
I finally got round to watching the first episode last night, and enjoyed it very much - I agree with Chris that the disgraced politician is a marvellous character, as was the peasant woman and the woman forever throwing herself out of the window. The final twist about the new owner of the hall being suddenly able to see the ghosts really opened it up, it'll be interesting to see how this develops.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 22nd May 2019, 12:45 AMMaybe they just love the diversity of it and want to big it up with unmerited praise. Some of the comments on here and elsewhere on it being funny are as worrying as they are puzzling. If this is hilarious what is Fawlty Towers?
Fawlty Towers is hilarious. That doesn't mean nothing else can ever be described as 'hilarious' ever again.
The Mail and the Telegraph liked Ghosts too. Are they big fans of diversity, do you think?
This bit isn't really directed at Kipper alone: Call me old-fashioned, but I like to sit down and enjoy a TV show or film based on it's merits. Is it funny? Well written? Well acted? But some of you don't seem to be like this. For some of you a show is ruined if a TV show or film has too many ethnic minorities or too many women in it. This, if anything is what is "worrying" and "puzzling" about this.
I liked Ghosts. You don't have to. It's a legitimate view - there are certainly things wrong with it.
But if you didn't like it simply because two of the cast are black or because some of them are women, clearly the problem lies not with Ghosts, but with you.
Quote: Chris Hallam @ 23rd May 2019, 10:17 AMif you didn't like it simply because two of the cast are black or because some of them are women, clearly the problem lies not with Ghosts, but with you.
I don't think people's dislike of the show is based in any way on skin colour or gender.
I think it's because one of the actors is Welsh.
Quote: Chris Hallam @ 23rd May 2019, 8:41 AMThe pros definitely outweighed the cons though. It was sometimes very funny.
I truly do not understand how anyone has found this programme remotely funny, never mind "very funny" or "hilarious". The subjectivity of humour is fascinating.
Quote: Chris Hallam @ 23rd May 2019, 8:41 AMThe trouser-less politician and the caveman were comedy standouts for me.
"Comedy standouts"?
Quote: Chris Hallam @ 23rd May 2019, 8:41 AMSadly, a few posters on here are (let's not mince words) RACIST
Though not aimed at me (I hope) I believe that's rather harsh, Chris, and frankly unnecessary. This is based on that they have an opposing, or just a different view to you?
Personally I felt the casting of Mike was incorrect. Yes, I didn't think Alison would have found him a particularly attractive proposition for a boyfriend/husband.
The actor doesn't strike me as being sufficiently good looking and the character seems a bit stupid. I'm sure not all white women find black men to their liking, the same as they don't find all white men so (and I should know!). And vice versa, of course. I don't think that makes me RACIST and would be surprised and disappointed if anyone did.
In my defence I was, and indeed still am, a big fan of the very funny and superbly acted My Wife and Kids. Ghosts would like to be a fraction as funny.