Top Of The Pops 1978 - BBC4 (Part 2)

16970727475230

Comments

  • pedrokpedrok Posts: 16,758
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I was 12 when YMCA was in the charts. To be honest, a pretty naïve 12 year old, from a small Lanarkshire town. I had no idea they were gay. I had a very stereotypical view of what gay 'looked like'. And that was a very camp, girlie look, just like Mr Humphries from 'Are You Being Served'.

    Big guys dressed as cowboys, indians and policemen were not gay.

    Of course, looking back now, it seems clear they were very gay, but as a naïve 12 year old it just didn't register.

    Going back to another comment that was made around the atmosphere of these TOTP's. In my memory they were always very atmospheric, almost party mode. However, watching these repeats I am struck as to just how bored the studio audience seemed most of the time. I have obviously being getting confused with the early 80's atmosphere, which does seem more of a party atmosphere.
  • ramraider1ramraider1 Posts: 14,176
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Rich Tea. wrote: »
    I'm just wondering if everyone on here has watched the whole Savile Top Of The Pops that Darnell put the link up for? Apart from the bit about the nazi uniforms there has been little input about that episode which had things been different and Savile kept his hands to himself, we would have seen on BBC4 last Thursday I suppose.

    Darnell, are you intending, or able to post future un-broadcast episode links like you have previously done, in the weeks they would have been shown?

    As for DLT, the longer the silence continues the more confident I feel he will suddenly be in the news facing no further action. Under those circumstances I presume that BBC4 would immediately and without hesitation re-instate his continuing episodes without any delay. Adding in his missed ones from the past 8 months would be a treat too, and not unreasonable as an add on extra in the schedule. How many shows of his have we so far missed? About 6 is it?

    There is one person who I would willingly see have his collar felt by Yewtree if it was the only way to get his dreadful tosh off our screens. Initials SC. More than enough said. Pipe dreaming I think.

    I thought the episode which Darnell posted was on the whole very good whith a couple of blips ( both featuring parts of Legs and Co unfortunately). Marshall Hain, Elvis, Motors, Rats, Bush , BOC and ONJ all very palatable. The Kate Bush and Elvis Costello singles featured are my favourites by those 2 artists. Why is the song featured on the chart run-down usually amongst the best on every programme ? The same could often be said about the play-out song.
    I also noticed in this episode an 'overdose' of the flute as a featured instrument. No joy there.
  • corriandercorriander Posts: 6,207
    Forum Member
    So your claim is that ultra conservative US radio in the 70s gave huge support to an act 'everyone knew' was gay? You weren't around in the 70s I assume...no radio in the US or here would have supported a blatantly gay act... to be perceived as gay meant career suicide...not until the mid 80s could such acts be successful (Bronski Beat, Frankie Goes to Hollywood) but notably not in America. Just because the Village People eventually became synonymous with gay culture doesn't mean they were when they first got mainstream success. Mainstream success was not possible for evidently gay acts which is why all the group's media interviews then avoided the issue completely. You might as well say "everyone knew they were gay because they had moustaches", forgetting that at the time straight men all had taches.

    They were never a gay act as such. Their lead singer at the very least was straight. They were a sort of cartoon group (bit like the Archies) based on gay stereotypes but in a sort of funny (not witty) way. That is how they got onto mainstream US radio. They were seen as pretty harmless.

    In fact, of course, they did emerge from the San Francisco gay community, as had Sylvester a few months before (not as big a star but he was out and proud.). HE still got radio play.

    Had Village People been out (and I believe some members may have been gay, but did not shout about it) they would indeed have been seen as unsafe, but they were pretty harmless, so they made it huge for a while.:)
  • ServalanServalan Posts: 10,167
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    (1) Have you never heard of Larry Grayson, John Inman, Frankie Howerd, etc, etc.............
    (2) :confused:

    And have you never heard 'Glad To Be Gay', a far closer representation of what life was like for gay people in 1978 (or 1979, for that matter)?

    The three names you cite may have been as camp as Christmas - but none of them 'came out' during the height of their careers. Indeed, Grayson effectively denied himself any personal life whatsoever because he lived in dread of what the tabloids would do to him (and his career).

    It's very easy to look back at their material now and for them to seem very obviously gay - but it was a completely different time then. Beyond the innudendo and knowing winks, there was nothing. People just laughed at the camp humour and looked no further. Those performers weren't the same as Graham Norton or Strictly's Revell-Horwood and Tonioli.

    Tom Robinson and Sylvester were the only 'out' performers of that era - and look at their chart careers.
  • Fred E StarFred E Star Posts: 1,693
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You're right nobody suspected Grayson at all, even with his "What A Gay Day!" catchphrase.
  • The GathererThe Gatherer Posts: 2,723
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Servalan wrote: »
    And have you never heard 'Glad To Be Gay', a far closer representation of what life was like for gay people in 1978 (or 1979, for that matter)?

    The three names you cite may have been as camp as Christmas - but none of them 'came out' during the height of their careers. Indeed, Grayson effectively denied himself any personal life whatsoever because he lived in dread of what the tabloids would do to him (and his career).

    It's very easy to look back at their material now and for them to seem very obviously gay - but it was a completely different time then. Beyond the innudendo and knowing winks, there was nothing. People just laughed at the camp humour and looked no further. Those performers weren't the same as Graham Norton or Strictly's Revell-Horwood and Tonioli.

    Tom Robinson and Sylvester were the only 'out' performers of that era - and look at their chart careers.

    Yes, a Number 8 hit for Sylvester in August 1978. But no one knew he was gay. Then everyone found out and stopped buying his singles. :rolleyes: I refer you to Fred E Star's post which is much more the reality.
  • vauxhall1964vauxhall1964 Posts: 10,335
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    corriander wrote: »
    They were never a gay act as such. Their lead singer at the very least was straight. They were a sort of cartoon group (bit like the Archies) based on gay stereotypes but in a sort of funny (not witty) way. That is how they got onto mainstream US radio. They were seen as pretty harmless.

    In fact, of course, they did emerge from the San Francisco gay community, as had Sylvester a few months before (not as big a star but he was out and proud.). HE still got radio play.

    Had Village People been out (and I believe some members may have been gay, but did not shout about it) they would indeed have been seen as unsafe, but they were pretty harmless, so they made it huge for a while.:)

    The Village People came from New York not San Francisco. They were not based on 'gay stereotypes' at all..that's putting a contemporary view on it. As Pedrok said the gay stereotype in the late 70s was the effeminate Quentin Crisp/Larry Grayson type not moustachioed men in army and cop uniforms or biker gear. They were based on stereotypes of American manhood, the construction worker, Marlborough man cowboy, GI, Marlon Brando-type biker.... Mainstream America in the 70s would not at all have looked at these images and said 'they're dressing like gay men'... the very opposite in fact.
  • Fred E StarFred E Star Posts: 1,693
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I know you can't trust Wiki but even the opening section of their page says you're completely and utterly wrong!

    "Village People is a disco group that formed in the United States in 1977, well known for their on-stage costumes depicting American cultural stereotypes, as well as their catchy tunes and suggestive lyrics. Originally created to target disco's gay audience by featuring popular gay fantasy personas,["

    They've ALWAYS been considered a gay act.
  • Fred E StarFred E Star Posts: 1,693
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Just noticed this line " the very opposite in fact."

    Yeah, America looked at them and thought "What a manly rugged bunch of hetrosexuals"

    I'm sure you're on a wind up!
  • vauxhall1964vauxhall1964 Posts: 10,335
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Just noticed this line " the very opposite in fact."

    Yeah, America looked at them and thought "What a manly rugged bunch of hetrosexuals"

    I'm sure you're on a wind up!

    you seem totally unable to separate what you see today from how mainstream America would've seen things 40 years ago. If you think Americans then thought a man dressed as a biker or a GI was dressing 'gay' you couldn't be more wrong. They hadn't got the faintest idea of these emerging subcultures.

    The Wikipedia quote says they were trading on American cultural stereotypes, not gay stereotypes. It also says they were targeted at a gay audience initially. When they crossed over with YMCA they were no longer targeting that niche audience. The band were given strict instructions not to identify themselves as gay to the media.

    I've got a library full of books on gay men's culture to know exactly what I'm talking about. But apparently 'everyone knew they were gay'... which is I assume why the US armed forces wanted to use them in a recruitment campaign?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 297
    Forum Member
    Rich Tea. wrote: »
    I'm just wondering if everyone on here has watched the whole Savile Top Of The Pops that Darnell put the link up for? Apart from the bit about the nazi uniforms there has been little input about that episode which had things been different and Savile kept his hands to himself, we would have seen on BBC4 last Thursday I suppose.

    Darnell, are you intending, or able to post future un-broadcast episode links like you have previously done, in the weeks they would have been shown?

    As for DLT, the longer the silence continues the more confident I feel he will suddenly be in the news facing no further action. Under those circumstances I presume that BBC4 would immediately and without hesitation re-instate his continuing episodes without any delay. Adding in his missed ones from the past 8 months would be a treat too, and not unreasonable as an add on extra in the schedule. How many shows of his have we so far missed? About 6 is it?

    There is one person who I would willingly see have his collar felt by Yewtree if it was the only way to get his dreadful tosh off our screens. Initials SC. More than enough said. Pipe dreaming I think.

    The Savile episode was very good (I reckon 2 of Legs and co "fell ill" at the time of that Smurf number!)
    Elvis Costello in good form and Don't Fear The Reaper at the end also.
  • Fred E StarFred E Star Posts: 1,693
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You just don't get it!

    I was there at the time, it was plain as the nose on your face that they were gay!!!
    You didn't need a flipping library of books on gay mens culture to tell you this, no matter where in the world you lived!

    Give the Yanks more credit, do you really think that their singles were bought Stateside by countless hetrosexual men?

    you seem totally unable to separate what you see today from how mainstream America would've seen things 40 years ago. If you think Americans then thought a man dressed as a biker or a GI was dressing 'gay' you couldn't be more wrong. They hadn't got the faintest idea of these emerging subcultures.

    The Wikipedia quote says they were trading on American cultural stereotypes, not gay stereotypes. It also says they were targeted at a gay audience initially. When they crossed over with YMCA they were no longer targeting that niche audience. The band were given strict instructions not to identify themselves as gay to the media.

    I've got a library full of books on gay men's culture to know exactly what I'm talking about. But apparently 'everyone knew they were gay'... which is I assume why the US armed forces wanted to use them in a recruitment campaign?
  • Ian 57Ian 57 Posts: 212
    Forum Member
    Thanks Faversham Saint for directing me to this forum. Makes interesting reading, and nostalgic viewing, of course!
  • UrsulaUUrsulaU Posts: 7,239
    Forum Member
    darren1090 wrote: »
    The schedules I've seen suggest that, after having this week off, we have another TOTP next Thursday, and then the week after it's the "Cardiff Young Singer of the Year Contest" on Thursday evening. So things are going to get a bit sparse...

    Whaatt?? - You mean we are only gonna get one TOTP episode this month? :(

    And this Thursday's one is a pretty poor episode by the look of it! :(
  • vauxhall1964vauxhall1964 Posts: 10,335
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    You just don't get it!

    I was there at the time, it was plain as the nose on your face that they were gay!!!
    You didn't need a flipping library of books on gay mens culture to tell you this, no matter where in the world you lived!

    Give the Yanks more credit, do you really think that their singles were bought Stateside by countless hetrosexual men?

    I just don't get it? That's rich. You have offered not a shred of evidence from that period to support your view that 'every knew'. Given the extremely high levels of dispaproval towards homosexuality in America in the late 70s do you really think that this act sold millions of records to countless gay-friendly 'we know they're gay but that's cool' heterosexuals? Who do you think were buying millions of their records? Gay men?? They sold mostly to young people under 20 who then would've been anything but 'cool' in buying records by an act 'every one knew' was gay. You also haven't answered my point why the US armed forces used them in a recuitment drive.
  • Fred E StarFred E Star Posts: 1,693
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I'm not going to argue with you anymore.
    You were obviously living on a completely different planet to me during the 70's.
  • LittleGirlOf7LittleGirlOf7 Posts: 9,344
    Forum Member
    So anyway,

    Top Of The Pops...yeah.


    pedrok wrote: »

    Going back to another comment that was made around the atmosphere of these TOTP's. In my memory they were always very atmospheric, almost party mode. However, watching these repeats I am struck as to just how bored the studio audience seemed most of the time. I have obviously being getting confused with the early 80's atmosphere, which does seem more of a party atmosphere.

    I think the difference is down to the pre-record nature of those 70s shows to the live editions of the 80s. It would've been a lot of standing around in a warm studio with a lot of stopping and starting. Depending on who was performing in the studio it could become quite stilted and lose a bit of atmosphere. With the excitement of live TV and a generally buzzier feel, the 80s editions have more punch about them.

    I watched the TOTP New Year's Eve special at the end of last year. It was pre-recorded and to say the audience looked like death on a stick is speaking kindly. Sam & The Womp were on and they just stood and stared. There was one shot of a random girl dancing along enthusiastically but no-one else was moving (had I been there I would've at least given it a good shoulder shuffle). Most of the audience did seem late 20/early 30s, with some quite obviously having come straight from work. It just had no atmosphere at all.
  • Ian 57Ian 57 Posts: 212
    Forum Member




    With the excitement of live TV and a generally buzzier feel, the 80s editions have more punch about them.
    .

    That's for sure!
  • chemical2009bchemical2009b Posts: 5,250
    Forum Member
    UrsulaU wrote: »
    Whaatt?? - You mean we are only gonna get one TOTP episode this month? :(

    And this Thursday's one is a pretty poor episode by the look of it! :(

    It's likely been done to stop episodes going ahead of schedule caused by Yewtree.
  • corriandercorriander Posts: 6,207
    Forum Member
    The Village People came from New York not San Francisco. They were not based on 'gay stereotypes' at all..that's putting a contemporary view on it. As Pedrok said the gay stereotype in the late 70s was the effeminate Quentin Crisp/Larry Grayson type not moustachioed men in army and cop uniforms or biker gear. They were based on stereotypes of American manhood, the construction worker, Marlborough man cowboy, GI, Marlon Brando-type biker.... Mainstream America in the 70s would not at all have looked at these images and said 'they're dressing like gay men'... the very opposite in fact.
    No one else but a gay-friendly group would have such OTT stereotypes of men. No, in the 1970s, the "effeminate" stereotype gave way above all to the clone, which was sort of reclaiming masculinity in the throes of gay lib. The Village People had a sort of campy take on male stereotypes.But the idea was that these were hot.

    They came from New York, but of course their songs were full of innuendo. San Francisco You've Got Me is full of gay meaning, but again can be taken er . . . straight. Similarly with Macho Man, and indeed In the Navy and YMCA. You could take it either way; that is why they got played on the radio and moved into the mainstream.

    Their best song is, perhaps, Go West, which is full of the image of the American "tough guy." But Go West could also mean go to San Francisco.

    In the gay community the gay aspects were got of course, but they did a clever game of being interpreted as harmless, which of course they were.:)

    And great fun too.:eek:
  • corriandercorriander Posts: 6,207
    Forum Member
    you seem totally unable to separate what you see today from how mainstream America would've seen things 40 years ago. If you think Americans then thought a man dressed as a biker or a GI was dressing 'gay' you couldn't be more wrong. They hadn't got the faintest idea of these emerging subcultures.

    The Wikipedia quote says they were trading on American cultural stereotypes, not gay stereotypes. It also says they were targeted at a gay audience initially. When they crossed over with YMCA they were no longer targeting that niche audience. The band were given strict instructions not to identify themselves as gay to the media.

    I've got a library full of books on gay men's culture to know exactly what I'm talking about. But apparently 'everyone knew they were gay'... which is I assume why the US armed forces wanted to use them in a recruitment campaign?
    Macho Man crossed over pop in 1977, making number 25 on Billboard.

    Fundamentally, I agree with you.Of course, not everyone knew they were gay.
  • Westy2Westy2 Posts: 14,357
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Going back to the saga of the Bee Gees promo for Night Fever not being shown due to BBC Four not wanting to pay for use of the Saturday Night Fever footage.

    Just been watching Vintage Tv & they have just played a film clip of said song not featuring any SAF footage & featuring a clean shaven Barry Gibb!

    Was the Beeb ever offered this footage to use at any point?
  • ServalanServalan Posts: 10,167
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Yes, a Number 8 hit for Sylvester in August 1978. But no one knew he was gay. Then everyone found out and stopped buying his singles. :rolleyes: I refer you to Fred E Star's post which is much more the reality.

    You are rather missing the point - and blowing a large hole in your own argument ...

    Like Tom Robinson, Sylvester never pretended he was anything other than gay - much to Fantasy Records' regret, I'd guess, but that didn't stop them promoting him without dwelling on his sexuality - hence the massive hit. But they couldn't keep it a secret forever and the cat was truly out of the bag when the promo for 'You Make Me Feel (Mighty Real)' aired on TOTP in all its glory. His chart placings were never the same afterwards.

    Village People, as corriander and vauxhall1964 correctly say, may have featured coded visual references to those in the know, but the group never 'came out', nor were they sold to the general public as a gay group (in the way Bronski Beat explicitly were in the 80s). Their appearance was passed off as harmless disco panto and that's how most people took them. I don't doubt there were people who thought they might have been gay - but there was no concrete evidence ... until a tabloid expose on the group post-'In The Navy' lifted the lid on what they were really about. And look at their career after that.

    If you and Fred E Star want to convince yourselves everyone knew, fine. But I've yet to hear a convincing argument from anyone as to why an apparently openly gay group would be embraced by the public in 1978/1979 - there was no such thing then, because it would have been career suicide.
  • LittleGirlOf7LittleGirlOf7 Posts: 9,344
    Forum Member
    My Dad says he knew the Village People were a gay oriented act when he bought the YMCA single and says everyone knew. At least, he didn't know anyone who didn't.

    It seems they didn't especially have to come out. People - gay, straight, bi, other - who liked the songs bought them and enjoyed them fully aware of the nod to gay culture and simply didn't care. That aspect of the group and music may have passed some by but to suggest nearly everyone outside the coded grand circle of all things disco and gay were oblivious to it is ridiculous.

    As far as I can make out, more straight people into pop music in 1978 totally got what was going on with the Village People than didn't. There was nothing subliminal about them.

    In regards to Sylvester, were his singles as good as what came before his sexuality was outed?
  • The GathererThe Gatherer Posts: 2,723
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Servalan wrote: »
    You are rather missing the point - and blowing a large hole in your own argument ...

    Like Tom Robinson, Sylvester never pretended he was anything other than gay - much to Fantasy Records' regret, I'd guess, but that didn't stop them promoting him without dwelling on his sexuality - hence the massive hit. But they couldn't keep it a secret forever and the cat was truly out of the bag when the promo for 'You Make Me Feel (Mighty Real)' aired on TOTP in all its glory. His chart placings were never the same afterwards.

    Village People, as corriander and vauxhall1964 correctly say, may have featured coded visual references to those in the know, but the group never 'came out', nor were they sold to the general public as a gay group (in the way Bronski Beat explicitly were in the 80s). Their appearance was passed off as harmless disco panto and that's how most people took them. I don't doubt there were people who thought they might have been gay - but there was no concrete evidence ... until a tabloid expose on the group post-'In The Navy' lifted the lid on what they were really about. And look at their career after that.

    If you and Fred E Star want to convince yourselves everyone knew, fine. But I've yet to hear a convincing argument from anyone as to why an apparently openly gay group would be embraced by the public in 1978/1979 - there was no such thing then, because it would have been career suicide.

    I normally agree with a lot of what you write, but you're way off beam here. I refer you to LittleGirl's response to your post. To say that people stopped buying Village People records because they suddenly found out they were gay after In The Navy yet hadn't had a clue before this is to my mind utterly ridiculous and a rewriting of history. As is the suggestion of mass homophobia - there may have been some homophobia but not on this scale and certainly not amongst the majority of the younger, record buying public. But like I said before, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, because it doesn't look like we're going to get a consensus.
This discussion has been closed.