Gordon Ramsays magic touch !

Conrad

ninky wrote: »

okay, you lost me there. my gran liked pottering round a national trust garden and poking through the homes of the erstwhile rich. but she certainly wasn't in the running for mensa membership.

explain?

Some out of touch middle class individuals have this notion that the masses don't want to be fed TV junk, but this simply does not reflect the real world, which causes me to wonder if some don't interact with, the type of person I meet daily.

Let me give an example which is absolutely typical of MOST of the people in the town where my business is and certainly not a cliche and you will see these everywhere you go from Legoland to the local swimming pool;

She eats MaCdonalds and Pizza Hut (not P Express), she reads OK and Hello, watches Sex In The City, Jordan & Pete and Eastenders, shops at Iceland or Aldi (she calls it Aldi's), she talks about the all night Playstation party they have planned, chitchats on innane relationships day long but never the Universe or Politics. her boyfreind lives for his lowered Vauxhall Nova, they go to the multiplex on a Friday to watch a Hollywood blockbuster after having bought some Nikes, she has no engagement with music other than HipHop or Pop. She idolises Gangsta Rappers and thier talk of dare dolla bills driving them 5.0 with the bytches.

She would NEVER visit a National Trust property or watch Horizon.

There are millions of Brittons like this.

I agree there should me more documentaries and quality output, but I am left dumbfounded that some of the chatterati truly beleive the masses want to be anything other than dumbed down.

ninky_2

Zagu wrote: »

ninky claimed that you had to be of the "intellectual elite" to be able to recognise that tat exists.

no, i was more arguing with the point that tat is so prevalent because the masses are stupid.

it now sounds like the argument is being turned around into saying the masses aren't stupid, it's just they don't like being intellectually challenged.

the real reason for the prevalence of 'tat' is not in the intellectual capacities or appetites of the audience. it's that it's cheaper to make (and therefore consume). the same reason primark sell more suits than saville row.

Conrad

Zagu wrote: »

I don't understand your point. ninky claimed that you had to be of the "intellectual elite" to be able to recognise that tat exists. It's like saying that you have to regard yourself as being in the same class as Bronte to recognise that JK Rowling is a bit crap, or equal to Bach because you think Westlife should be banned from making another record, which seems like nonsense to me.

I'm simply stating the fact there are a great many fairly simple folk that are very happy to devour junk TV and wouldn't want it any other way.

bendix

You know what ninky?

For a middle class hippy idealist, you're not too bad.

Zagu

ninky wrote: »

no, i was more arguing with the point that tat is so prevalent because the masses are stupid.

Which makes you "part of some miraculous intellectual elite with superior powers to the ignorant masses"?

Sounds like backtracking to me, which is understandable.

ninky_2

Conrad wrote: »

Some out of touch middle class individuals have this notion that the masses don't want to be fed TV junk, but this simply does not reflect the real world, which causes me to wonder if some don't interact with, the type of person I meet daily.

that will be me then. i must remember to start living in the real world on not in this imaginary planet of my own making.

do you actually know these gansta rap loving, mcdonalds scoffing people or are you making judgments based on scraps of observations, fragments of conversation and filling in the (very large) blanks?

perhaps we should hand out IQ tests to national trust visitors and the viewers of sex in the city and see which ones score higher. i'd be less sure than you of the results.

Conrad

Zagu wrote: »

Which makes you "part of some miraculous intellectual elite with superior powers to the ignorant masses"?

Sounds like backtracking to me, which is understandable.

To be fair, a well engaged intellectual mind is almost by definition likely to process the world around them in a more rounded fashion objective than a passive mind that floats along on the tide of consumerism without any empathy with the Pri mark sweat shop worker.

bendix

ninky wrote: »

that will be me then. i must remember to start living in the real world on not in this imaginary planet of my own making.

do you actually know these gansta rap loving, mcdonalds scoffing people or are you making judgments based on scraps of observations, fragments of conversation and filling in the (very large) blanks?

perhaps we should hand out IQ tests to national trust visitors and the viewers of sex in the city and see which ones score higher. i'd be less sure than you of the results.

Now you're onto something there ninky. Intellectual apartheid! I LIKE IT.

We could give tests to the entire country and those who failed to get a certain score could be kept aside somewhere - maybe relocated to Wales, for example. That would actually help raise the national IQ level of Wales for a start, a beneficial side effect.

All the McDonalds, Primarks, BHS and Vauxhall car sales yards would automatically relocate to Wales at the same time, leaving England's green and pleasent land to the rest of us, to be filled with chichi coffee shops and bistros.

We would, of course, have to tax the stupid much more, but that's no problem because we could lessen the impact of that by subsidising Iceland meals and Pizza Hut promos. They wouldnt know the difference, providing you were there to keep providing them with chat shows and Richard and Judy indepth political interviews.

I think we're onto something here . . .

Conrad

ninky wrote: »

do you actually know these gansta rap loving, mcdonalds scoffing people or are you making judgments based on scraps of observations, fragments of conversation and filling in the (very large) blanks?

I really know them, and it's one of life's great mysteries as to why some middle class idealists do not seem to engage with this other world - seriously this really is a mystery to me.

I'm genuinely interested to know how you avoid these interactions?

Zagu

Conrad wrote: »

To be fair, a well engaged intellectual mind is almost by definition likely to process the world around them in a more rounded fashion objective than a passive mind that floats along on the tide of consumerism without any empathy with the Pri mark sweat shop worker.

You should try being more objective. I can only guess as to the points you try to make.