Happy Sundays (1995)

'Hello, is that the SPGB?'

TV Review from the December 1995 issue of the Socialist Standard

The flagship programmes of the Autumn schedule have come to an end and Sundays on BBC 1, in particular, are not quite the same. Last of the Summer Wine and Keeping Up Appearances have both finished their runs and left a bit of a sitcom vacuum. Anybody who could bring themselves to stay awake past Songs of Praise will have noticed that they complemented one another effortlessly.

These two programmes have much in common. Both are situated in what appears to be the more picturesque parts of the country, with most characters recognisably from the north of England. Both contain formidable and domineering middle-aged women (Hyacinth Bucket—pronounced “Bouquet" in one, almost the entire female cast of the other). Both have hen-pecked husbands to add to the list of stereotypes (Richard Bucket and Howard, respectively). Both feature amusing though work-shy lumpen-proletarian slobs (Compo and Onslow) on the male side and tarty nymphomaniacs on the female side (Marina and Rose). Furthermore, both programmes—while certainly funny in parts—are incredibly formulaic, so much so that it is almost possible to set the clock according to the order of the scenes.

Perhaps it is not so surprising that the programmes have such obvious similarities though. They are, after all, written by the same scriptwriter. Roy Clarke is a privileged man indeed to have had two sitcoms broadcast within two hours on the same day, week in, week out.

There is of course much to criticise in these two sitcoms, not least of all the rampant stereotyping which was also evident in Clarke's earlier—and rather funnier effort—Open All Hours. But Last of the Summer Wine and Keeping Up Appearances are two of the most watched and loved programmes on British television. Is it simply because they are the funniest? Almost certainly not.

Yorks Branch of the SPGB trying to do a paper sale. 

This charming man

Roy Clarke has a talent for giving the uninteresting if not downright boring an allure and appeal that other scriptwriters do not achieve. Consider this—hysterical though he may be, few would want to spend any time in the leisure centre of Gordon Brittas from The Brittas Empire, but they flock to Holmfirth in Yorkshire to visit the houses and cafes frequented by Compo, Foggy and Clegg. And it is not just the scenery that attracts them either, it is the entire sense of cosy working class community and solidarity which many aspire to in real life but few attain because of the ruthless nature of the capitalist system. It is a similar phenomenon to that which makes Coronation Street so popular, a phenomenon previously noted in this column. The characters in these sitcoms that do not conform to this image are always the least content—Hyacinth Bucket, or for instance, the miserable sniping Pearl in Last of the Summer Wine.

One of the most amazing features of these sitcoms, however, is something which never receives comment in the newspaper reviews. This is odd, because it is a feature which is both obvious and attractive to most viewers. It is the fact that hardly any of the characters are employed. Some have no visible means of support whatsoever, yet go about their daily tasks as normal without any sense of great loss. Though there are a couple of shopkeepers, not a single character in Last of the Summer Wine has a job. Since Richard retired in Keeping Up Appearances not a single member of the extended Bucket family appears to be employed, either. No wonder the we find these programmes so appealing! In addition, most noticeably as far as Last of the Summer Wine is concerned, there are no bosses and unions, no apparent money troubles and no crime. Everybody gets on with their own business without too much interference from outside forces while still inhabiting what is identifiably a real community. Halcyon days indeed!

With these sitcoms and Coronation Street the bourgeois escapism of Dallas and Dynasty has been replaced with a sore of working class utopianism. Characters who are concerned with riches and status are derided while the true stars are those who shun this more conventional approach to life and yet still live in some degree of apparent happiness. It is a world away from the City of London and the monotonous grind of the production line.

While human existence can never be one big sitcom, it is clear that many workers identify with a situation where people seem to live without the intrusions of money, status and profit into every aspect of life and where those concerned with such things are laughed at or pitied. Such workers who identify with a lifestyle of solidarity instead of competition without the intrusion of wage slavery are ripe for change. And it is about time the idle escapism was turned into an active reality.

Dave Perrin