Incitement to rebellion, interesting, very thought provoking, subversion sub version hmmm. Break/fracture the word and what are you left with?

Subversive?
Classic Fascist treatment of a subversive. Execute an innocent party as a punishment.

If they did throw out "the most popular" HM then there would be some silent satisfaction and great relief in the remaining group who would be glad to see the back of a potential rival for the money.They would not voice this of course but just rant against Kitten.

Except that there is nothing subversive about Kitten. She conforms to every single stereotype of the posturing middle-class anarchist. This kind of character has been a subject of ridicule for decades... Citizen Smith, Rik from the Young Ones, etc etc.

Kitten would probably agree with you without understanding your point.

I think you're pushing it a bit to attribute Kitten's behaviour to some complex motivation rooted in a sophisticated intellect that some of us might not fully appreciate.

I think that her motivations is simply childish attention seeking. Since entering the house she has shown no sign of intelligence whatsoever. On the contrary, she is wilfully ignorant - any debate with which she's involved will simply degenerate into a Jerry Springer-style slanging match.

I honestly don't think the woman has a clue what's going on!!

Hi Kevraff, maybe you are right. Does this mean that BB are just using her?

subversive adj : in opposition to a civil authority or government

In the context of BB she is exactly that. Whever she confirms to a sterotype or not, shes still a subversive within the boundaries of BB.

any punishment, especially collective punishment, is a dangerous example for big brother to be setting. especially as entertainment.

Punishment simply does not work, and has never worked. it sets a bad example and it is counterproductive. The only truly effective and successful methods of dealing with "unwanted" behavior comes through compassionate communication, negotiation and education.

when big brother starts dealing in punishments, (especially when tasks are set in which housemates are encouraged to punish each other, along with the deplorable example set by big brother threatening collective punishment in order to make kitten compliant) then it becomes impossible not to draw comparisons between this contemporary entertainment show, rooted in the totalitarian associations of orwells oppressive nightmare and examples currently being set by our ally, the world's dominant superpower, america

In a letter in january this year to U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Human Rights Watch stated that at least four house demolitions appeared to be for the purpose of punishing families of suspected insurgents or compelling their cooperation.

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004.../usint6924.htm

collective punishment is prohibited by the Geneva Conventions.

the Fourth Geneva Convention (Article 33) states:
"No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation are prohibited."

It is a matter of opinion whether being asked to leave the house is a punishment or not. If people misbehave in your house, asking them to leave seems really OK. They are not having their freedoms curbed or body violated.

The idea that BB might at its own discretion evict one of the housemates was a clever attempt at undermining Kat's script. She too thought it really clever. The producers were well advised. She didn't think to quote the Geneva convention to BB - that would have been a fun retort.

I do find it interesting that there is a Geneva convention article which deals with people being punished for actions they themselves did not commit.

Are there any other articles which the BB experience contravenes? And is it at all relevant?

Purnah

I think too much is being read into this... it's a game, have you forgotten that?

True, people are living in what could be described as an "oppressive regieme" but at the end of the day the housemates have prescribed themselves into it by volunteering themselves for ten weeks. They've made a commitment, they know the rules... the most important of which is the "Big Brother has the right to change the rules at any time"

While I agree that BB can't really do anything they want to, I'm sure that they know what they can and can't do - after all, have you ever heard of a TV show/company without lawyers? Think of the Have I Got News For You?!

of course its a game. but nothing exists in a vacuum or in isolation. especialy not in bricolage mediums like tv or newspapers where trivia and news blurs into one.

Trying for Private Eye's Pseud's Corner?

The whole trivial "celebrity" news that exists in society today isn't something I like to watch/read or even know about. It comes to something when even Newsnight mentions David Beckham's new haircut, as I seem to remember happening once...

I apologise if my original reply seemed somewhat ignorant to your views, that's not how it was meant to sound. It's refreshing to see a thread with a well thought out point that's researched and backed-up.
Last edited by HSX2004 : 03-06-2004 at 22:22

A question that follows from this is whether you are in Romania or Northh korea or China or Portugal - some dictatorships fall apart when pushed - others kill you. BB as you say can't actually kill HM (or expel united HM) which is why it is fascinating to see the substitute, eviction of an individual, explored like this. Dictatorships don't get roasted though if they kill innocent people and they don't have to worry about undermining their winner by doing it

I'll support the analogy. Dictatorships have to consider ordinary people's likely reaction as much as TV producers do - there's always the possibility the people will rise up and the dictator will face the firing squad, like Ceausescu. There have been tensions in the ruling parties of many dictatorships about how to control the population, between those who favoured oppression and those who favoured conciliation.

In terms of BB5 I don't see Kitten as an effective subversive. Whilst sometimes she has a point, in a sort of George W Bush way she finds so many potential targets and picks ones with too little evidence to convince anyone that the target is a real one.

Yes it is just a game. We are just having a discussion about what sort of political system is equivlent to BB. whilst it is a game, its interesting from a social point of view as well, and the way BB works is a small insight into how Non democratic political systems work.

I like these more serious threads now and again, makes a change from the one liners.

But Kitten is actually a conformist in the outside world.She is almost a poster child for the liberal classes.She gets her jagged opinions from the extreme left instead of the right.The way she expresses herself is very dictorial though,dismissing other peoples opinions without being able to listen if they don't conform to her exact view of the world around her.

kitten's listening skills do let her down, and she's not always articulate, but i think its frustrating for her because very often what she is saying is right.

In your opinion!

I hav'nt heard anything she has expressed politically that you could describe as 'right'.Its all been subjective and defined from her own prospective.It can only be agreed as 'right' if all people from all prospectives agree it is.

i'm tired and my eyes are going googly from too much screentime, but to reply hurriedly and off the top of my head.....

firstly she was right to confidentally disobey big brother by being in the jacuzzi during saturdays task. it was more comfortable than a crowded sofa. there was no reason in the world why anybody should obey the instruction to remain on the sofa. what purpose is there to such a petty command?

she is right whenever big brother summons her and she replies that she'll come in her own time. there really is no hurry. and no single reason to do as instructed just because it suits big brother's wishes.,

during the suitcase hostage drama she articulated a number of important points about the nature of power and why people tend to automatically submit their own power to voices of authority. she also articulated that people in power don't want to give up the power voluntarily, and therefore it has to be taken.

when big brother asked her to close the diary room door, she was entirely correct to ask why. there is no reason why.

during the painting she described how all minority groups take for granted how things are a bit better for them today and that they are standing on the shoulders of disobedience activists from the past.

and when emma called her selfish for causing someone to be evicted, kitten was right to point out that it was big brother who chose collective punishment. kitten has always been prepared to take responsibilty for her own actions. she also correctly sussed the eviction was gonna happen anyway. blaming it on her was a ruse to create tensions.

Wow, informative thread. Could it be Kitten is playing into BB's hands? She wants so desperately to break the restrictions they impose that she hasn't stopped to realise in doing so, she is just creating good TV (which is what BB is). This in turn causes BB to keep the source of the good (Kitten) which leads them to fuel her anarchy, which she abides by, but doesn't realise if she really wanted to anger Big Brother, the best thing she could do would be to walk...

Unless her actions are really just a chance to have a minority voice broadcast on public TV, causing people to question their lifestyles and communities... but it doesn't appear she's that smart, but, who knows?

firstly she was right to confidentally disobey big brother by being in the jacuzzi during saturdays task. it was more comfortable than a crowded sofa. there was no reason in the world why anybody should obey the instruction to remain on the sofa. what purpose is there to such a petty command?

Biomorph, this is an excellent thread and you have articulated a number of interesting points. However, I must take umbrage with you about Kitten's supposed 'anarchic' nature. I disagree that she was right to disobey BB by staying in the jacuzzi. Taking that to its' logical conclusion, if the rest thought the same, there would have been total and utter chaos and no-one would have had the chance to express themselves in the dairy room. If you are suggesting that Kitten is right to do as she pleases, then just as she is right to do as she pleases so is everybody else, what's to stop me going into the house with a gun and killing them all? (OK, a bit OTT and obvious things like lack of a gun and their security would stop me but I'm just making a point). Kitten's facile disobedience is churlish and childish behaviour it is NOT anarchic. Just as in any societal infrastructure there have to be rules and in entering that house, the housemates should abide by the rules. Agreed that it makes interesting viewing and despite her (in my opinion) lack of intellect, she is playing a clever game by making herself and the programme interesting. Where she falls down is in her inability to comprehend that rules can be broken but not ignored completely.

sticking with the example of the jacuzzi versus sofa saturday task disobedience, ...... there was no reason why any of them should be on the sofa. its a pure example of big brother's petty tyranny to demand that they remain on the sofa. they could be called to the diary room from anywhere in the house.

kitten was right to highlight this absurdity. and she is right to persist in demonstrating her own adult autonomy against a model of non negotiable petty control.

you point out that in any societal infrastructure there have to be rules, but those rules shouldn't be created autocratically, they should be negotiable and democratic

fundamentally the housemates do all the work in making this show so they should have equal say in creating the rules.
Last edited by biomorph04 : 04-06-2004 at 11:59