Cool to be thick

Entertainment For Lively Minds

Posted by jazzjet on 21 October 2011 - 8:29pm.

I was struck by a comment on The Book Show last night when someone was talking about the Hip Hop Shakespeare project. He said that selling the idea to groups of young people could sometimes be a challenge because they often believed it was 'cool to be thick'. Watching popular quiz shows often throws up people who are clearly not embarassed to be thick. In fact they often take pride in it. Celebrities sometimes seem to follow the same trend. 'What am I like?' etc.

When did this start to happen? I'm not talking about people who are genuinely thick - which may be due to poor parenting, inadequate education or other reasons - but people who appear to glory in their thickness. Is it a generational thing or across age groups?

More from jazzjet.
Login or register to post comments

Don't know why

people revel in this status and it's why I can't stand Phil Tufnell.

jimmyshoes01 | 21 October 2011 - 8:50pm

Why him?

I like Phil Tufnell as a TMS commentator.

And he knows the largest brick built building the world (TMS in joke).

Uncle Wheaty | 21 October 2011 - 9:54pm

Because

he sprang immediately to mind. I don't listen to TMS and the only time I see him is on TV and he revels in not knowing stuff, simple stuff.

jimmyshoes01 | 21 October 2011 - 10:26pm

As someone involved in research science

it is always striking to me how proud some people can be to be "crap at maths/science" at school. Imagine people saying, "oh yeah I was crap in English - couldn't even spell my name"

Never seen that attitude in, say, India or China

BigJimBob | 21 October 2011 - 9:09pm

But surely this is to disguise the person's own feelings...

of thickness?

No-one, but no-one, wishes to be thick & proud of it.

Don't smack 'em in the head with a nail, it's not nice.

andielou | 21 October 2011 - 9:32pm

Keepin' it real.

...
This all started in the late hateies.
See Loaded, Oasis, Hedo-hip-hop, New Labour, Big Brother, Personality presentation.
Unfortunately media outlets open themselves up to several counts of unhipness if they counter this race to the bottom.
It neatly skips, hand in hand, with a new barbarism and cruelty.
May end in acceptance of some form of Fascism.
OOAA

drilltime | 21 October 2011 - 10:02pm

i was wondering about this, so i checked...

1994 seems to be the key year as that was the breakthrough for Oasis, the start of Loaded magazine, and the death of John Smith (paving the way for Tony Blair and the New Labour project). Big Brother was first broadcast in the UK in 2000.

Not being a smart arse but i'm not sure what you mean by hedo-hip-hip (hedonistic hip hop?)

Loaded was an interesting magazine at the outset with some very good writers ...

Glenbervie | 21 October 2011 - 10:44pm

Loaded

First couple of years with James Brown at the helm.

Inventive, fresh, interesting, thought provoking and yes, a little bit daft.

Brown left - Loaded made hay hitching on the Dadrock/New Lad/Chris Evans bandwagon and now cant get out of the rut. Will close within a year IMO.

It's the prevalence of "Media Studies" as a degree that irks me. What is it? What is it's purpose, aside three years of dossing around? If you are interesting in the "media", do a journalism course. You get a trade that way.

Six Dog | 22 October 2011 - 11:13am

Media Studies has always seemed to me to be akin to

doing a degree in 'Carpentry Studies' rather than just learning to be a chippy or cabinet maker.

stimpy | 22 October 2011 - 11:21am

Or a degree in English Lit rather than just learning to write?

;-)

thus speaks a man who very nearly did a masters in media studies in the mid-1980s (got the place on the course but couldn't get a grant) ... at the time, the earlier version of me was fascinated by the way the Falklands War then the Miners Strike had been covered by the Beeb and ITV so media studies seemed like an interesting thing to do ...

it seems - to the current me - that the media has got even more interesting in the intervening 25 years or so ... for one thing, there's just more of it (TV 'platforms', hundreds of channels, the internet, blogging, video cameras on the backs of mobile phones and so on and on and on ... )

surely this is actually a reasonable area of study? especially if it's done well, with decent methods and it produces insightful results?

dissertations on the Semiotics of Eyelashes on the X-Factor might be a bit loopy but studies on Informal Channels of Shareholder Control in Commercial Television, for example, might be quite fruitful

Glenbervie | 23 October 2011 - 9:58pm

Bad News

and More Bad News. I can remember being quite struck by those publications from the Glasgow Media Studies Group - was that where you were headed by any chance? The name of the lead author escapes me at the moment but I recall the light bulb going on, at it being pointed out that in news reports unions always "demand" and "threaten" while management "ask" and "plead".

Lando Cakes | 23 October 2011 - 11:28pm

I am the only arty person I know...

... who is not bad at sums. I passed maths with a struggle, and I have some science qualifications from school. And you know what? I'm pretty damn proud of this. And I wish I knew more now. I feel my ignorance somedays quite badly...

ganglesprocket | 21 October 2011 - 10:11pm

I used to be shit at sums

And then I realised I wasn't. I'd chosen to be, because I had a perverse pride in not being one of those rational types. I used to think logic and science was for squares. What a prick I was.

Fortunately, I fell in love with Mrs B. 13 years later, she's changed me for the better in uncountable ways. That's one of them: I'm now fiercely pro-science, pro-logic, pro-rationalism and pro-maths.

Bob | 21 October 2011 - 10:23pm

Maths is beautiful

and only a fag-paper away from music. Although it took me a long time to realise how close the two were.

SimonL | 22 October 2011 - 12:10am

Which of course

Prompts this piece of music:

BigJimBob | 22 October 2011 - 6:13pm

Surely it's just rebelling by being the opposite of

Thatcher who pretended she was intelligent but was so obviously thick.

Axekeith | 21 October 2011 - 10:59pm

What Is General Knowledge These Days?

Watching Pointless on TV "and what would you like to come up as a topic?" "Oh cooking or the music of Westlife?" - I remember as a kid feeling thick becuase an Uncle was into quizzing and around the dinner table would ask questions of his children - always Greek and Roman gods, Capital cities and such like.

Tony Donaghey | 22 October 2011 - 12:18am

Pointless

Pointless is a prime example of people having pride - or maybe having no shame - in appearing thick. Someone the other day put forward as the battle of Ypres as part of the Crimean War. Whenever I watch Pointless my jaw often drops to the floor, and I'm no university professor.

jazzjet | 22 October 2011 - 10:14am

In fact

more and more "quiz shows" don't require any knowledge, witness Deal or no deal, and Red or Black. Big Brother is basically a quiz show where the winner is the more "likeable" person.

BigJimBob | 22 October 2011 - 10:25am

I don't think

we need to worry about Red or Black any longer - I'll be v. surprised if it's back. Deal or no Deal is more interesting, because you could go on that show with a fairly solid grounding in Bayesian probability and be able to do ok, luck or otherwise - but the show really grates on me; not just because of Noel Edmonds.

Hoorah for Only Connect and University Challenge, I say. And I miss Fifteen to One. Even Mastermind's too easy now...

illuminatus | 22 October 2011 - 3:44pm

Glad you said that..

"Hoorah for Only Connect and University Challenge, I say. And I miss Fifteen to One. Even Mastermind's too easy now..."
Especially University Challenge which still amazes me how some of them know that stuff.

Tony Donaghey | 22 October 2011 - 7:13pm

Another thumbs up

for Fifteen-to-One! That was "cup-of-tea-before-homework telly" when I was 14 or 15.

milkybarnick | 23 October 2011 - 9:17pm

I was on it;

I was sh*te!

Most interesting thing (for me) was that it's pretty much done in real time. A couple of very short pauses, to reposition camera, and one reshoot (answer verging on right, but wrong, so 2nd chance given), but basically as live.

WG Stewart was coolly imperious, as you'd hop he'd be, and winner was entertainingly intense and driven (he'd won before!) and I got my travel to/from that London paid, so it was all good fun. Still, I was sh*te(!)

Wish it was still on - great quiz, with daft, non-avaricious prizes.

iainiain | 23 October 2011 - 10:01pm

Me too!

When I was 21. I didn't do half as well as I thought I was going to do. I got to round 2. I knew so many of the other contestants' questions, but not enough of my own. Cruel mistress.

Art Vandelay | 25 October 2011 - 2:30pm

I didn't make it past the audition

even though I don't remember being too bad. And they held it in a really weird little hall in Acomb, in York, which was odd.

illuminatus | 25 October 2011 - 2:55pm

I was on twice

I think I was the first contestant to appear a second time. I came 2nd in my first appearance; knocked out when they said my answer was incorrect, when it was actually correct. So they gave me a second chance (had to come back a couple of weeks later, not done straight after). I was introduced as a wronged loser, so everyone picked on me and I didn't make the final this time - oh well. I was also on 100%, and was most upset when they told me it was 100% Gold for old farts (I reckon it was a lot harder than the 'younger' version.

I am of a scientific background (but hardly setting the world alight - a bit of a scientific failure, really) but have absolutely no skills on the artistic side, and am far too logical for my own good.

BTW, I got a sweat shirt for 100%, but nothing apart from a photo of myself with WGS and the other finalists (I had to ask for a copy, too). Expenses were paid, however.

geedubyapee | 27 October 2011 - 1:41pm

Erm, shakespeare

hip hop, cool to be thick, is there an elephant here that I'm missing?

niscum | 22 October 2011 - 12:43am

THIS report makes for frightening reading...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-15387444

It's main argument is that black boys equate learning with being gay which is, of course, a no-no for those of West Indian descent.

stimpy | 22 October 2011 - 11:07am

Good call stimps.

I saw that article the other day, and it rang true with my experience of inner city Primary school teaching in the early 80s. In the same class, the asian and chinese kids were coming to school each day with can-do, teach-me attitudes, while some of the young Jamaican boys were obviously being told by someone or other that school was not cool. Strong single mums and hands-on grandparents saved quite a few little lad's educational bacon.

Vulpes Vulpes | 22 October 2011 - 6:59pm

1972.....

.....is when it started to happen.
Check out Jagger's speaking voice from 1972 onwards compared to the way he was talking in the mid-60s.

Ol' Mick saw where it was going early doors and was always more a barometer of changing times than the much vaunted Bowie.

ranger | 22 October 2011 - 9:56am

I don't think so

If anything I would draw a different conclusion. In '72 Mick decided to drop his own standards while Bowie went on to set new ones.

Ahh_Bisto | 22 October 2011 - 10:02am

Bowie

All a persona - his Bromley Dave accent was far closer to his real accent than the rather eloquent brogue he now speaks in.

Six Dog | 22 October 2011 - 11:17am

His 'real' accent?

Given the Dame hasn't lived in Sarf London for 50 years (I assume), it's not unreasonable to expect his accent to have changed.

I spoke with a Scouse accent when I was 7, I certainly don't now - not through a deliberate decision to change, but just as a result of where I've lived and the people with whom I've mixed. I certainly wouldn't regard a Liverpool brogue as my 'real' accent.

stimpy | 22 October 2011 - 12:14pm

Science vs The Arts.

I have never understood why there seems to exist a divide between the two. Surely the scientifically minded and their counterparts in the arts are both seeking the same thing, a deeper understanding, whether that is expressed in numbers or paint seems to me a difference in approach rather than a reason to argue about which has more value.
As for people revelling in their ignorance, I've met many over the years who take a perverse pride in their never having read a book, visited an Art Gallery or listened to anything more challenging than the super soar away top forty. It seems a crying shame that some take so little interest in the world they inhabit but for some it seems ignorance is bliss.

Pencilsqueezer | 22 October 2011 - 12:03pm

Books

Not sure it's a new thing. I remember baby sitting in the late 70s and going to young parents homes where there was not a book to be seen, even in the kids bedrooms. The difference then was that it wasn't a professed badge of pride.

jazzjet | 22 October 2011 - 1:51pm

The other side of the coin

I remember an uncle bringing his new partner to visit.

She opined that there were more books in our house than in a library. This wasn't intended as a compliment.

Carl Parker | 22 October 2011 - 2:52pm

An ex-GF's parents were priamary school teachers

the dad always swore that a parent told him that they NEVER hd books in their house as they "haboured germs."

BigJimBob | 22 October 2011 - 3:38pm

I'm hopeless with numbers,

hated maths, and yet I am almost superhumanly intelligent. Not quite smart enough to understand why people (mainly maths teachers) equate an ability to perform like a calculator with raw intelligence, though.

Burt Kocain | 22 October 2011 - 12:11pm

Do they?

I'm not altogether sure there's any link between the ability to do mental arithmetic and 'intelligence'.

What IS intelligence anyway? Is it the ability to wire a plug, recite your 13 times table, analyse Shakespeare, list all the Frank Zappa albums in order of release date, pass a verbal reasoning test, decline a Latin verb or none/all of the above?

stimpy | 22 October 2011 - 12:19pm

That's certainly not the case now

From the start of my PGCE course we've been drilled in the theory and practice of different learning styles and differentiation in our classes. I'll be taking my own classes in a couple of weeks, and one of the main criteria I'll be judged on, and coached in, will be how I cater for different forms and levels of "intelligence" in my pupils.

So for an example, if I put the topic for the lesson up on the board, I can expect a certain proportion of kids to write it down straight away and learn it. But another proportion will need to see pictures and video; and some will get it if they act it out or do some other physical task. (These sets are not mutually exclusive, of course.) And whichever way I teach it, some will get it straight away, and will need an extension activity so they don't get bored; and some will need extra coaching to learn. All this goes into a 50-55 minutes lesson. And I'd better show evidence of planning & preparation beforehand, to manage it, and keep an orderly classroom to boot.

I remember a few bad teachers from my schooldays, and they certainly wouldn't pass the teaching courses we have now. Thankfully.

keefus | 22 October 2011 - 12:52pm

Interesting

the way that NLP has become mainstream. Or possibly Bandler and co. nicked the idea of visual, auditory, kinaesthetic etc. from elsewhere.

Lando Cakes | 22 October 2011 - 1:47pm

VAK

Slightly old hat, that, in education theory circles. Bit surprised if it's still current in Initial Teacher Education, as it was being spoken of a bit sniffily even when I was training. Time was, you'd have to show that you'd differentiated explicitly for visual, auditory and kinaesthetic learners, whereas I prefer to see the BTs (beginning teachers) I train to plan a range of task types for everyone to do, to force kids out of their comfort zones. Incidentally, I don't know if it's a direct NLP lift, although god knows NLP still causes enormous numbers of educationists to thicken and engorge excitedly.

But yeah, Keefus is right: the idea of teaching and learning in one way - i.e. the teacher's preferred one - are long dead for most of us. And quite right too. Although try telling the PE department (JOKE! JOKE! NOT THE FACE!)

Bob | 22 October 2011 - 2:23pm

It's not referred to as an NLP thing

And the emphasis is on knowing your class, as individuals and their strengths & weaknesses. More a pragmatic thing, I think, than theory; though it's early days for me.

keefus | 22 October 2011 - 5:28pm

I fear VAK

learning styles or whatever you wish to call it will become educational fashion and disappear. The present government from the whispers that we keep hearing seem more interested in knowledge for passing exams rather than learning. I teach young children and the lack of aspiration is frightening, from the parents as well as the kids. Schools are being forced (not just by this government to be fair if I must) into being results machines. Maybe I'm just feeling cynical this evening - its been a hard term so far. On a slight tangent the whole idea of academic qualifications can be overated. Society needs to start revaluing skills, like making things. I remember talking to the guy who plastered my lounge who reckoned I was cleverer than him. He had his own business, a nice car and was quite frankly an artist with his trowel and yet he felt he was inferior. How wrong is that?

daddyclark | 23 October 2011 - 9:31pm

Ah yes,

Learning Styles.

We were pounded with this during my HEA accreditation programme. I wonder if you've ever had this discussion during your studies, however:
Do Learning Styles Exist?: http://www.learningstyles.webs.com/, or this jumping off point (http://reviewing.co.uk/research/experiential.learning.htm#axzz1bWCXlpnL), which provide critiques of the Kolb model

I have a number of educationalist colleagues on the campus where I work who are fairly sceptical about the whole "learning styles" theory, mostly because of problems with actual evidence basis to confirm it. It was a pet fave of Paul Ramsden and his books, especially while at the Higher Education Academy. A number of them are of the opinion that concentrating on a dominant learning style is actually counter-productive, as we all constantly use a mix anyway. The more interesting problem is how knowledge and understanding is triggered at a sensory level and how memory is retrieved.

illuminatus | 22 October 2011 - 3:15pm

Hooray, more stuff to read!

But seriously, thanks very much for those links. I'll have a delve.

keefus | 22 October 2011 - 5:30pm

According to Mrs toro

Who knows a thing or two about this sort of stuff the key is enabling students to have the skills to discover their own preferred learning styles.

In my day I copied lots of stuff down off the blackboard.

el toro calvo grande | 22 October 2011 - 8:37pm

I think Ali G

dealt with this subject very well in the late 90s. Turning the tables on the educated in interviews.

niscum | 22 October 2011 - 12:24pm

It's not about smart/not smart

I'd refuse to believe that the relative balance between the two is the same.

What drives me up the pole is the celebration of ignorance. I can't put my finger on it, but somehow the pursuit of knowledge or self improvement became uncool; and the celebration of the mundane and a resolutely narrow world view, and an abject lack of intellectual curiosity became things to be proud of.

sitheref2409 | 22 October 2011 - 12:39pm

Ignorance is not a sin

After all, we are all ignorant.

The sin is a bloody minded refusal and pride in not seeking to make oneself slightly less so.

illuminatus | 22 October 2011 - 3:17pm

I blame Joe

Whiley.

Mr Fade | 22 October 2011 - 12:58pm

Is he

Jo's brother?

Red Umpire | 22 October 2011 - 2:09pm

Great thread

Many great observations here (though C- for the savants deciding because they don't like Thatch and Cameron, both politicos are - which they are not, and the left has not yet learned that because someone disagrees with you, it does not mean they are stupid).

The 7 dimension model of intelligence (aesthetic, kinaestetic, verbal, spatial, etc. - pushed by Howard Gardner) is sadly unsupported by anything as vulgar as data. There is a lot of work on intelligence though (I did a PhD in the area). If you are good at one thing, you tend to be good at the other. Not always, but generally. It breaks down a bit as you get older or have higher ability, and it doesn't help in the UK where people are specialising too early (my kids at a comp are already asked to go for a largely art or science-oriented set of GCSEs and a levels). As another contributor observed, folks in India and China are laughing at us and our pride in stupidity, and after a couple of generations, it's really starting to show.

I can chase the 'cool to be a fool' thing back to when i was a kid in the early 70s when the shared received culture was often pretty intelligent ("Ascent of Man, Civilization, etc. on TV; even ITV made an effort to inform as well as entertain on occasion). Unfortunately, there was a bit of a class war going on in society, and it became the utterly false and pernicious 'cool-authentic-thick-working class' versus 'uncool-superficial-educated-middle-class' dichotomy. If you are genuinely dim (or a socialist-sentimentalist, or a nastily manipulative plutocrat), you accept this vile divisive crap (still pushed in films like the recent "Tyranosaur"). Academic aspiration has been lost in the rise of celebrity culture, and the deskilling of life.

Vincent | 22 October 2011 - 3:31pm

Interesting point

If you read (or see) old fashion fiction like How Green was my Valley you will see that education was very much valued. It was seen as the only passport out of the mine. In developing countries that equation still holds.

Nowadays, the X-factor, etc seem to be the route to redemption/affirmation. Whenever, I watch X-factor with my kids (which is every bloody time it is on) and we get The Back Story about how they want it So Much, I always start up with "of course if they put that effort into their education, they wouldn't need redemption through Simon Cowell because they could be coining it as his lawyer by now" My kids now wait for me to make the comment as soon as the "redemption music" starts up.

BigJimBob | 22 October 2011 - 3:48pm

That doesn't stand up to scrutiny

I'm afraid that you may be guilty of the very thing you complain of in your first sentence - fitting facts to your existing world-view.

Wherever the 'cool to be a fool' thing originates, it certainly isn't from the left. As evidence, I cite the left's near obsession with education and its potential to transform lives. Examples include the WEA, Labour Research Department, Socialist Sunday School Movement etc. No self-respecting group, however small, is complete without its own newspaper.

This has been reflected in Labour's record in office - the Open University, ending the 11-plus nonsense, expansion of the universities etc.

Is that tradition as healthy as it was? No - however that's a symptom of a more general decline, not the cause of it.

Lando Cakes | 22 October 2011 - 6:05pm

To quote the Manics

To quote the Manic Street Preachers (not something I do frequently):

Libraries gave us power
Then work came and made us free

Red Umpire | 22 October 2011 - 6:29pm

This book is a wonderful

This book is a wonderful indication of how far things have become screwed up from how they were.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Intellectual-Life-British-Working-Classes/dp/030...

It has to be noted that the 11-plus enabled many bright working class kids to jump through the glass ceiling. And it was the privately educated bien-pensants who kicked the ladder away.

Vincent | 22 October 2011 - 4:35pm

I had a quick flick through it on Amazon

The introduction piqued my interest, so I've bought a copy.

Thanks for the recommendation. I suspect reading it may be like being being preached to when I'm in the choir, but I don't care.

As a more general thing, someone above mentioned the, in many ways illusory, distinction between arts and sciences. The best example of such a discussion is, to my mind, CP Snow's Two Cultures (wikipedia link here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures).

illuminatus | 22 October 2011 - 5:13pm

CP Snow was on the money

Talking of money and picking up on Snow's tenet, one of the critical reasons why economics and economic theory has led us a merry dance and to the brink of financial ruin is because many years ago it stopped being a social science, like history or cultural studies, and instead became almost exclusively empirically based.

The bottom line is that the bottom line has much to answer for as a means of measuring value in the human condition.

Ahh_Bisto | 22 October 2011 - 6:15pm

Absolutely agree

This is going to sound really Neil The Hippy but....

What always gets me about economics is that about £5000 years ago or so, one guy says to another; "look I'd like to take that goat off you and normally I'd give you two lambs for it. However, since I haven't got them today, I'll give you a token that is worth two lambs and you claim them back off me next time I have some." "But that stone isn't worth anything" "Yes it is, its worth two lambs...get it?"

5000 years later those simple trade tokens are seen to be most important thing in the world and the fate of whole countries and peoples lives are dependent on them. It is almost like a collective delusion....as far as I can see it is a collective delusion. Ferinstance, these agencies like Moodys who are downgrading confidence in countries like the USA thought that junk bonds were AAA investments 10 years ago.

Meanwhile, with card transactions and computer trading, money is now becoming an abstract concept of a abstract concept.

If you think about it long enough it is one of the most brilliantly mad activities that humanity participates in.

BigJimBob | 22 October 2011 - 6:41pm

Cool to be thick

wasn't it a Nick Lowe track?

Sheev | 22 October 2011 - 6:42pm

the asymmetry of the two cultures

When I finally met people who were professionally science or art oriented (as it were), I found that the people into science were often also into art and culture, whereas the arts types (as noted above) rarely sullied themselves with science. In fact, they would speak of science as "science" (as in "so called "science") and seek to "deconstruct" reality with all sorts of French philosophical and linguistic theory, some of which sounded a lot like sophistry and bull excrement. Suddenly to not get this perspective and be grounded to the material universe was to be 'thick' - or at least unhip. I concluded this stuff was a convenient line of rhetoric to avoid having to know anything or have responsibility for their arguments, which scientists cannot do. This sophistry was all nicely skewered in "intellectual impostures" (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Intellectual-impostures-postmodern-philosophers-...)

Vincent | 22 October 2011 - 8:06pm

Glad you said that

It's a fairly common experience for me too. Most of the science-y people I kne/know (I sirt on the science side too) also had an "art" part to their make up (but not all, I must say). Lots of them were musical, for example, and played - usually very well.

The "crowd" I mix with now are much more interdisciplinary and digital humanities, so are much more receptive to the science side of things. This bleed across can only be a good thing, as far as I'm concerned. The future will be less about specialism for many, and more about being able to navigate a much more complex space. There will be specialisms, of course, but I think fewer will sit in them

illuminatus | 23 October 2011 - 1:51pm

specialisation is for insects

Illuminatus, you are right, as ever: is it a conspiracy? I suspect the younger folks in arts and creative trades accept science in a way their 68er 'new left' tutors rarely did (ironically, science, like education, was revered by the old left and their genuine concern for how to improve the lot of the working man). The folks hostile to 'so called 'science'" these days tend to be some of the deeper greens, and the post-modernists seem to be rather old hat these days.

Vincent | 23 October 2011 - 2:17pm

Science is beautiful

The Mandlebrot Set (turn off your speakers, though!)

For no good reason, other than being pretty good, The Monochrome Set (turn them back on again!)

geebee | 23 October 2011 - 12:41am

Eh?

WhTS ALL THIS ABOUT?

chabsy | 23 October 2011 - 1:18am

This is interesting

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/8842639/Think-Britain-hasnt-dumbed-...

a feature on how the standard questions on Bullseye were so much more intelligent than those that a populist TV quiz show would ask today, such as;

“Who is the head of the Ismaili community?” and "Which British politician had bought shares in the Suez canal?"

Bullseye doesn't seem that long ago, and it didn't exactly seem like Mastermind at the time. Having said that, I didn't know the answers to these two questions.

Mac45 | 23 October 2011 - 2:15pm

I'll do my impression...

... of a contestant on "Pointless":

"Suez Canal? Sorry, I've no idea. That's before my time..."

Qmoq | 23 October 2011 - 6:25pm

The shares one is interesting

My first thought was that it was some sort of personal gain scandal - then, from the depths of Higher History, an astonishing 30-odd years ago, the name of Disraeli floated up. Didn't he borrow the money from the Rothschilds or something?

Lando Cakes | 23 October 2011 - 8:14pm

Seems to be

Disraeli's Government bought knockdown shares when the Egyptians were in huge debt. I'm not really up to speed on the whole story, though. Now that I think about it, all I remember of Bullseye was "great super, smashing" and " have a look at what you would have won." So clearly I wasn't paying attention.

Mac45 | 23 October 2011 - 9:31pm

Pitmen Painters

Great play. Great true story too. Anything like that happening now? Anywhere?

Anglepoised | 23 October 2011 - 9:38pm

Cool to Be thick

having seen 1 episode of "The Only way is Essex" and 2 of "Geordie Shore",thickness in the UK has risen to new heights. Or should that be sunk to a new low ?.
These people either possess acting skills that shame Olivier or they are genuinely in need of help.

On Quiz Questions,were there anything harder than those puzzles on 3-2-1 ?

Sour Crout | 23 October 2011 - 10:02pm

The 3,2,1 answers never made any sense to me

even when explained. They seemed contrived and incomprehensible.

davebigpicture | 23 October 2011 - 10:20pm

I get the same feeling when listening to

Round Britain Quiz on R4.

stimpy | 24 October 2011 - 11:22am

Thick as a brick

Well there's no doubt by now where the massive stands on this one, and quite right too.

I mean, it would be like having a musical movement which prided itself in not being able to play your instrument and which sneered at virtuosity.

I'm just nipping out now. It's OK, I was going anyway.

thecheshirecat | 24 October 2011 - 8:30am

It wouldn't though, would it?

Bob | 24 October 2011 - 11:24am

It depends on how you define the concept of Thickness.

Is it a lack of intelligence, as in a low native IQ, crude measure though that is, or is it a lack of academic qualifications?

The ability to play a musical instrument to a high standard is a combination of basic talent combined with study and practice. There are lots of very musically able people who do not have virtuoso talent in the same way that there are lots of very intelligent people without much in the way of formal qualifications.

Lenny Law | 24 October 2011 - 12:52pm

You could argue

that using a simple, direct form of music which grabs the attention and gets the message across is quite an intelligent thing to do.

But then that would be a response mixing up both points you've made there, which is less so.

milkybarnick | 24 October 2011 - 2:05pm

thick and smart musicians

thick

Liam Gallagher
Dappy ( N-Dubz)
Sid Vicious
Madonna (but shrewd enough to surround herself with smart folk)
Axl Rose
Bobby Gillespie (though he thinks he's smart)

smart

Noel Gallagher
Lemmy
John Lydon
Robert Fripp
Frank Zappa
PJ Harvey
Alice Cooper

Others?

Vincent | 24 October 2011 - 1:29pm

Isn't 'shrewd' just another term

for exactly the same quality that the 'out of touch with the real world' accusers would like to say is missing from many in academia?

So Madonna isn't thick, she's just living in the material world?

Vulpes Vulpes | 24 October 2011 - 4:16pm

Madonna

may be many things but "thick"? Nah. You're right about Gillespie, though.

man.of.soup | 25 October 2011 - 12:49pm

Madonna notoriously takes

Madonna notoriously takes good influences (as Bowie (the Dame) did before her) and has produced some good work because of this (dumb pop in the mid 80s, the William Orbit phase, the regal 1990 shows), but the Dame had some kind of integrative sense which Madge does not have - it's Madge's designers and stylists driving what is best about her. When she pushes ahead with her own ideas it's generally a car crash (note her movies, her recent gigs with the faux-rock). I think the Dame also had the sense to retire from music, recognising she didn't have the ideas in thast domain any more. But the dame had a decade of ideas worth several careers from many others. Integration, use of the tools around you effectively, and self-aware insight, to me, are what intelligence is about.

Vincent | 24 October 2011 - 4:35pm

I always feel The Dame has a heart,

a human one, no matter how much of an 'alien' he's appeared at times. As for Madonna? Not so much. She could well be an android.

Mr Fade | 24 October 2011 - 5:44pm

Blame Roger and the Boys

To answer the question - when did this happen? It was in 1979 (wasn't that the year Maggie took control also!)

We don't need no education , we don't need no thought control, however we wouldn't mind some of Bully's Prizes, so if you could make the questions a tad easier that would be brill - cheers!

Gooner1050 | 25 October 2011 - 1:25pm

Pointless

Pink shirted pillock on Pointless today who said proudly : ' I'd only read a book if the TV was broke and there are four in the house so that's not going to happen'.

I rest my case, m'lud.

jazzjet | 26 October 2011 - 7:46pm

User login


Barton
Back in denim.
Tell me about Michael McDonald please
Realpolitik versus Conspicuous Compassion
Try saying this after a couple of pints
Any PC tech headz in ?
Moogle
New Instant Classics for the Summer Holidays
Your Magazine Needs You (And Most Of Your Family)!
Andy Partridge and Ben Folds writing together?

Hot Topics - Last 7 Days

Title
Reply with a crap James Bond	127
Least rock and roll-looking frontman?	99
In praise of the Chelsea pensioners...	96
Chillaxing...	93
Anybody get into Bands or Artists long before they became future legends?	78
Music to sleep to	64
Eating in Pubs - not what it used to be	60
Songs About Trains... let's rock!	57
This is my Word Massive jam.	48
In the New issue Mark Ellen says Ross Noble is Welsh	46

Hot Topics - Last 4 Weeks

Title
Anyone you'd care to nominate for future Word In Your Ear gigs?	203
It'sh All About Yourshelf - A	162
A Taste Amnesty	151
Poor, poor Rebekah Brooks.	145
Famous films that you 'dont get'	140
Roy Hodgson for England ?	137
Dexys on Jools Holland last night	135
Reply with a crap James Bond	127
The Classic Americana Album?	124
Mr Bean Moments	123

Cool to be thick

User login

Recently Updated

Hot Topics - Last 7 Days

Hot Topics - Last 4 Weeks

The Sites We Like

The Word Social

About Us

Popular Tags