Oh, the poor buggers.
Probably best left in ignorance!
Horrible tea. Page 5
Nah we all shared lots of rounds of morphine and didn't give a shit for 5 days - it could have been easter for all we cared 
Quote: Alan C @ May 29 2008, 11:36 PM BSTNah we all shared lots of rounds of morphine and didn't give a shit for 5 days - it could have been easter for all we cared
Eh? What? So you were all in for severe constipation then?
Im sorry but the original sketch is about 35 years out of date. It would never be produced.
Quote: Winterlight @ May 30 2008, 12:09 AM BSTIm sorry but the original sketch is about 35 years out of date. It would never be produced.
Who cares? It was never intended to go any further than this forum. So why are you 'sorry'?
"It would never be produced."
Ah, you have the power of prophecy I see. And as you have the power to see into the future, which no other single human being has, ('nobody knows anything' aka William Goldman), could you please tell me with the same certainty, next Saturday's winner of the 3:30 at Wincanton?
Quote: Alan C @ May 29 2008, 11:36 PM BSTNah we all shared lots of rounds of morphine and didn't give a shit for 5 days - it could have been easter for all we cared
That actually sounds better than most Christmases.
Quote: Danny K @ May 29 2008, 6:36 PM BST"sycpophantic praise." You've just insulted five members of this forum. Is that your thing? Being offensive?
I didn't feel insulted, by the way.
But fair play, it's nice to have a big roll on this type of thing again. The argument/discussion threads are usually a good read.
I think Alan C or James Bolam said what I was going to. What's offensive or out of order is always in the eye of the beholder. In that sense, if anyone thought this sketch racist or borderline, then it was - at the very least, it was to them. There aren't universal truths on this. I don't want to impose my value judgements on anyone else in terms of comedy taste, but that doesn't mean I won't say when I think somebody has crossed the line. Quite often they might think I'm an over-sensitive tosser. Or miss out the all-important important adjective in that sentence.
Anyway, I liked the original sketch, but thought it needed a punch. That's genuine, not sycophancy (there are plenty of other threads out there if you want that). But I confess that I read the preamble and dialogue more carefully than the rest of it. I think on reflection the first description of the character shopping was a bit slap-dash in stereotypical terms for my tastes, and I can understand why that has generated some debate. For me, the key (taste) point is that on reading the sketch it didn't even occur to me that the writer had an inkling of a racist thought in his head on writing it, nor did I think the outcome was racist - just a classical comedy of misunderstanding. The shopper isn't a victim, or ridiculed by anyone with any sense. The sketch read pure enough in its intent to me on that score.
Quote: Badge @ May 30 2008, 12:44 AM BSTI didn't feel insulted, by the way.
But fair play, it's nice to have a big roll on this type of thing again. The argument/discussion threads are usually a good read.
I think Alan C or James Bolam said what I was going to. What's offensive or out of order is always in the eye of the beholder. In that sense, if anyone thought this sketch racist or borderline, then it was - at the very least, it was to them. There aren't universal truths on this. I don't want to impose my value judgements on anyone else in terms of comedy taste, but that doesn't mean I won't say when I think somebody has crossed the line. Quite often they might think I'm an over-sensitive tosser. Or miss out the all-important important adjective in that sentence.
Anyway, I liked the original sketch, but thought it needed a punch. That's genuine, not sycophancy (there are plenty of other threads out there if you want that). But I confess that I read the preamble and dialogue more carefully than the rest of it. I think on reflection the first description of the character shopping was a bit slap-dash in stereotypical terms for my tastes, and I can understand why that has generated some debate. For me, the key (taste) point is that on reading the sketch it didn't even occur to me that the writer had an inkling of a racist thought in his head on writing it, nor did I think the outcome was racist - just a classical comedy of misunderstanding. The shopper isn't a victim, or ridiculed by anyone with any sense. The sketch read pure enough in its intent to me on that score.
Well said, oh-Badge-the-sycophant. 
If you read the comments that labelled you thus, you'll see the poster concerned was truly dismissive of your opinion. It was of no value - only that particular poster's opinion mattered - those who didn't fully agree were dismissed out of hand as worthless sycophants. The poster said you were the type of posters who mislead others into sending off crap material. That poster was rude, with a look-down-the-nose-at-lesser-mortals-than-I attitude. That poster knows how to critique, the rest of you don't - in her opinion. Okay, okay, that same poster has since pulled their horns in somewhat, but up to that point, the poster cared not a jot for your opinion. But if you weren't insulted, you weren't insulted, but originally your views were treated as worthless by that poster. If that doesn't rile you, I don't know what will.
Onwards: I think you have it, when you mention sensitivity. I really am well and truly, sick to death of people handing over their brains for washing, and after indoctrination, becoming so sensitive they see a 'red under the bed' for the slightest perceived infringement. Their sensitivity levels are all bolloxed up! They decry others for perceived misdemeanours on behalf of those who they maintain will be offended. Strangely none of these target 'offended' people ever make their displeasure known. But the PC brigade have an excuse ready for that too. And that's another thing. No one, but no one, is going to admit to belonging to the 'PC Brigade', but they are fully paid-up members emotionally. Time for them to take a look in the mirror, and stand by their convictions - as I am mine.
With two guests casting slurs on the HIGNFY team in the shape of misogynistic claims, and a recent programme reminder of Mrs Whitehouse censorship campaigns, it's a timely reminder to fight all corners, and brook all objections of those who inadvertently encourage self-censorship in comedy, in the mistaken belief they are arbitrators of good taste and experts in race and religion matters. They make me sick. Kick them out - and replace them with immigrants.
That way there'll be faster and better relations between communities without them imposing their 'I dictate this is how you should think; how you should speak' mantra.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the clip from the very first edition of "It'll be alright on the night" where a vox pops clip showed an Asian confusing Hebal Life shampoo with "horrible life" shampoo. My point being it's no more racist now than it was then; not as funny though.
I reckon we could beat the PC Brigade in a fight. They sound like a rubbish army. I bet they don't even have guns.
For me, the most amusing part of this sketch is that this entire fuss could probably have been avoided if you'd just said the customer was Swedish.
I refer you to the Not the 9 O Clock News chemist shop sketch about deodorant.
So many replies! I should have guessed there would be some sort of argument going on.
This isn't very funny Danny. It's too drawn out and the punch line is very, very obvious. If you shortened it and made it snappier then it might work, though I doubt it. I also think it has a kind of "dated" feel about it. It may have worked twenty, thirty years ago, but not now.
Bloody Swedes.
I thought it was good!