On BBC2, Penelope Keith presents a retrospective on Morecambe and Wise; a survey of the history and quirkiness of one of television’s best known duos. There are moments of genius, moments of silliness, and moments that are, well, at the risk of speaking heresy, dull. Perhaps it was all about context, perhaps it was about an accumulation of humour that made scenes that might otherwise have been seen as plain and inane as a cause for laughter. Perhaps the skill of the programme was in the realisation that its viewers were not the individuals of our time, choosing from hundreds of digital channels, even having menus of favourite viewing, but were most often family groups, different generations gathered around the single television in the house. Maybe the success of Morecambe and Wise owed something to them having something for everyone in the audience – and a very large audience it was.
In retrospect, the sheer power of television in those times seems extraordinary. If one had a television set, one watched it. Programmes that would now not find airtime, or would find only a small audience late at night, enjoyed large ratings because there was nothing else to watch. It would have been hard to imagine that times would come when houses might have multiple sets and pass evenings during which none of them were switched on.
In 2014, Morecambe and Wise would not find the success they enjoyed, not because they were not gifted, but because there would no longer be a platform for their talents that would draw tens of millions of viewers. Even the television soaps are reduced to a fraction of the following they once enjoyed. Times when families gathered in living rooms each evening to watch programmes together belong to a broadcasting age of innocence.
Perhaps the passing of an age when half the population might watch a light entertainment programme is not a great cause for concern, but the fragmentation of the national audience might have more serious implications.
If there were a serious national news story, how long might it take for it to reach everyone? In former times, public service regulations required television channels to carry news bulletins, one can now pass hours watching satellite channels without ever encountering a news story? And what about information and debate, where do people now find the facts to shape their opinions?
In another generation, Morecambe and Wise will probably seem as strange to people as the silent movies of the 1920s now seem to us – the context that gave them their appeal will have been lost forever. Perhaps, in that time, we shall rediscover a way of how to have a national discussion.
“Programmes that would now not find airtime, or would find only a small audience late at night, enjoyed large ratings because there was nothing else to watch.”
Maybe it is a factor of my aging and increasing crotchetiness but I beg to differ on that. With the multitude of channels now available, I find that there is less that one would watch – what may be good has probably been seen before and the vast majority of the remainder is not good enough to hold one’s attention.
I remember laughing more at the Dick Emery’s, Kenny Everett’s and Benny Hill’s than anything Mrs. Brown’s Boys’ or their ilk since.
The fact that there are forty or so channels to be flicked to see what is on is what delays one on the chair. When there were only one, two or five, that decision was quicker and we went about doing something else.
‘Times when families gathered in living rooms each evening to watch programmes together belong to a broadcasting age of innocence.’
Not just the evening of viewing but the following day at school discussion was about the programme the night before. With delayed recording boxes, online films and the plethora of channels, the chance of finding someone who watched the same as you the night before is limited – so another conversation topic eliminated so another excuse not to bother communication with ones community.
‘Perhaps, in that time, we shall rediscover a way of how to have a national discussion.’
I admire your optimism.
I read a blog recently where the writer had watched a film on Netflicks and then downloaded the book to his Kindle – no discussion or interface with the box office ticket seller; the usher; or the bookshop seller.
Is it a time when it is ok to have your thoughts or opinions but society shall not give you an audience, other than nameless internet blogs and forum, to discuss and debate?
BBC 4 has become a platform for the sort of programmes that once garnered large audiences who now subsist on a diet of soaps and talent(less) shows.
Television was once a community-builder, now it seems to contribute to an atomisation of society.