I think it is. You need to start with an open mind and keep a sense of perspective, but once that is sorted I find the show and the forum in tandem can be very enlightening indeed.

Perhaps my response doesn't entirely fit in with this thread, but I'll post it anyway.

I posted this a while ago in reference to a Wolfy thread and a posters comment. It sums up my thoughts really and though doesn't really answer your question, gives you an idea of my standpoint

Are you home from work yet, Poppy? I'm missing you.


I think Dexter is what is known as an acquired taste ...


My fault, Annsyre. I was being dramatic ... with a black and white movie reel of Frankenstein being harassed by the baying mob playing in my mind when I wrote that part of the preamble.


Thanks. I try. BB HM's may appear talentless maybe, Annsyre, but you humans seem to lap up all the drama none the less ...


None taken ... and thanks for the lovely welcoming comments in a previous thread. (I hadn't worked out how to block quote so failed to reply ... though I obviously have the multi quote bug now!


Doesn't matter what folk think. Whenever he goes, he will have had a little adventure ... and will hopefully put pep talks from other housemates into action.


Are you aware of the Stanford Experiment of 1971, Dave? Google the documentary. It is a very thought provoking precursor to BB ... based on power trade offs and 'Prisoner / Guard' dynamics ... and demonstrates how incarceration or other factors can twist a human being's concept of good and evil.


I hope the end game is even less predictable, (or more profound), than that, Gobby, but, as some of our posters have pondered, are the BB producers that cerebral?


Gina, IMO, historically, was very efficient in her put downs and conflict control, cleverly just dismissing folk rather than waste breath or time chastising those who annoyed her ... but since becoming aware of her popularity outside, I see cracks appearing.

An Thropologist and Danigirl.

(Thanks for the thumbs up, An Thropologist ... and the excellent comments. I'll catch up, absorb and respond to your post a little later.

Same for you, Danigirl. If your post was off topic on the thread you originally placed it on, it certainly isn't off topic here.

I'll respond later this evening ... unless distracted by that thing we call life!

Over and out ...

Interesting post On The Beach. I feel you give BB too much credit in your suggestions, and yet if your viewing of the show has made you ponder such matters then there is already something in it.

That said:


I hope this is always one point in a show such as BB - to challenge our preconceptions of people. Is it the only "true" reality show in the sense all it is is real people and how they are with each other. In real life, no matter what our intentions, we all judge people on first encounter and it is only when we get to know them that we begin to understand them (and when we can truly want to do so.)

There are a few things I have always found interesting about BB and how I feel about the people in there in the years I have watched.

The first thing is that once I have pledged my allegiance to a particular housemate which will usually take a little time for me to do, if that happens at all, unusually for a person I do not know in real life, in my reasoning I seem to do so as I would a friend. Our true friends we get to understand and since we all have our wonderful aspects and our flaws, there will always be negative things about even our very closest friends. But no matter how much we disagree with a friend or how much something about them irritates us, or what they may do wrong, we forgive them as we understand them. I seem to do this for those I side with in the house too. It's not like a friendship, as once they leave, I don't care: but while they are in there you get to know them in a way you usually only do a close friend I suppose...??

The other thing I find interesting is that no matter who ends up left in the house by the end of Big Brother, no matter if I disliked them and no matter if still I wish them not to win, by the end, at worst I feel sorry for everyone. I certainly have no strong dislike left for anyone by the time I have watched them for so long, even if I don't have particular like for them either.

There are obviously many interesting aspects about the housemates themselves that they cannot control. I particularly love the frequency that you see a housemate say a negative thing about another and something that has annoyed them most is a trait that could be directed back at the housemate who is irritated. They do say our own flaws in others irritate us most as it's ourselves who truly grate: who can escape that.

I am not sure what I think about the relevance of the Secrets and Lies aspect to be honest.

I would say that I don't think BB can hope for the public to take a specific thing away from the show as they cannot control the behaviour of the housemates to that degree, and if they could it would counter what the show was about in the first place. Obviously they can manipulate things to a degree. They can create more paranoia and they can certainly manipulate public perception by what they show of everyone. But they can't control who the housemates are or really know this in advance I suspect.

The thing that I think has had a big impact in terms of our perception of the show in a way is Michael-the-actor. I wonder how differently the public would have perceived housemates if, like them we did not know Michael was an actor until it was revealed. For instance, Dan suspected Michael and voiced this often. We enjoyed this and congratulated Dan since we knew the truth. How different would this have felt had we not known the truth about Michael. Would it have seemed like Dan was attacking Michael! Conversely, would we have had more empathy for the other housemates had we not known about Michael in the tasks where he did bad things to them....

In a bit of a rush/not thinking entirely as I'm watching the show, so this might not make much sense, thus apologies, but I shall post it anyway!!

An Thropologist,

OMG! (I don't ever even use that phrase - till a minute ago). Which branch of the discipline do you pursue? Origins of early Man? Human evolution? That sort of thing??? How cool! Or is it cultural anthropology, still fascinating ... or social anthropology ... Yep, I'm still wagging my tail

I'm staring at books on my shelf right now. Early Man by Jaquetta Hawkes. Man Makes Himself. by V. Gordon Childes. (RIP - suicide). Leakey's The Making of Mankind.

BTW. I love Lucy ... and Ardi ...

That's secret anthropologist code.

Anyway ... back to being sober O.P

Great! I'm really glad you responded with such a thoughtful post.

Agree. A fix suggests fraudulent duplicity ... though very manipulated suggests a degree of skill being deployed by BB in the prosecution of various scenarios.

They probably failed to be manipulative successfully because some of the plots bombed. e.g The heart broken girlfriend interview, the damp squib of the 2nd SH occupation and, LIVE right now, from the perspective of the HM's and some forum members, the eviction of Dan.

Would the word contrived be more appropriate? To deliberately create in an artistic or ingenious manner?

That would meet your own ideas to "put together a project plan with a number of possible plot lines. These plot lines would sit along with tasks I thought would be entertaining to watch while also having scope to be revealing."

And yes, with archetypes like this years batch of HM's presented exactly as you describe, the caricatures would be primed, ready to play out what we can now describe as a pseudo reality game show ... which qualifies as a pantomime by any other name!

"The villain, the tart, the domineering mother/father figure etc"

Yes. The use of archetypes, stereo-types or caricatures who can be played like puppets offers a kind of entertainment guaranteed insurance policy.

Anyway, even if we are wrong, there is a certain pleasure in watching the entertainment play out.

Did you find your page hiding on page 15 of the threads?

Out of courtesy, I was replying to 3 posters who commented at length with great posts earlier. The one above is one of three I have just written. I had planned to post two others in a minute.

Would you like to elaborate and explain your comment? Unless you are being ironic or apparently humorous, you have lost me.

Perhaps this, in a way, is also a form of acceptance - although an indication of most of the HMs self-absorption - the fact is they aren't taking time to pander to Sam (most of the time) and are therefore treating him as if he weren't disabled at all

----------

OP I love your opening post and understand most of it It reminded me of the final essay at the end of The Breakfast Club.

I had just been looking for my thread on the little poll I am carrying out...and found it on page 16, (the theads are moving so fast tonight).

While trawling through them, I noticed yours on page 15 - so just thought I would ask....sorry, my sense of humour.

Hi Danigirl,

I haven't worked out how to paste in a ready made quote already embedded in a box so can't include your fab ported across comment here. I can offer a comment though and folks can go back up the page to view your previous contribution.

---

Even Atheism is a belief system.

As sentient, self aware beings, we have great difficulty in comprehending our own mortality so we fill that infinite. mental vacuum with any soothing imagery we can muster.

I'm not sure it matters what form that takes but there will always be something. Some barrier, some belief system or some perceived greater force or power to act as a buffer to keep eternity from arriving too soon!

Wolfy says she talks and listens to nature. If she can find or attach meaning to that practice, good luck to her. However, her methods are crass and, like you, I found her Disney style, cartoon conversations distasteful. Plain silly.

I have friends who pursue a Wiccan spiritual path. They also talk and listen to nature.To be Wiccan is to worship the Earth and pursue the philosophies of the Old Religion, a belief system based on Pagan practice

Their respect for our planet and methods are inspirational.

You write, "There's a fine line between what we perceive to be normal and what society is telling us is normal."

Bingo. Right back on thread topic.

Society? Society is an intransigent, cold, steel track laid out by committee or dictate, not a living, breathing, reasoning individual we can ever hold an intimate conversation with.

This, (or any forum), is such an inanimate entity too. I mean, for all the humanity or passion laid out on these pages, there is no human that singly represents, embodies or can talk for this forum.

And BB itself?

It is just a show, just a concept ... with a framework and rules that shift like Sahara sand.

There is no fine line, Danigirl. What we perceive to be normal will come from our heart and we should follow it.

What society perceives to be normal comes from somewhere else and should be viewed with caution.

Don't break the law though ... cos that's naughty.

Hi Spiralistic,

Appreciated. Interesting reply also.

Yes, I can relate to the virtual bond that viewers make with their housemates favourites ... and others. This picks up on my First Impressions question, doesn't it?

And yes, we should be capable and able to forgive individuals in the house but, alas, as we witness on the boards, there is sport to be had in pursuing a quarry throughout a whole series so we know, don't we, that not all viewers, posters or readers will adopt such an honourable allegiance, less one that includes the redeeming quality of forgiveness.

You write, "They do say our own flaws in others irritate us most as it's ourselves who truly grate: who can escape that."

Ha, ha. In some forum quarters. (elsewhere), I hear that thrown at others when someone hits a raw nerve in a post. There is a phrase for it but I'll not give it the oxygen of publicity here!

I believe you are right though.

You add, "I am not sure what I think about the relevance of the Secrets and Lies aspect to be honest."

I know. Perhaps I am merely reflecting my own wish to imagine that there might be some innovative endeavor for BB producers to turn this years show into some ancient Greek mystery play with a moral or message.

Truth is though ... well, my truth ... with or without the input of BB producers, I feel I am indeed witnessing such a narrative.

We'll see.

Ha ha. Thanks, Muggins.

Intriguing. Pray elaborate ... or should I read the final essay of The Breakfast club myself?

I don't know if you know the film, it's about a mixed bunch of teenagers from various social circles at Saturday detention, and the essay they are all supposed to write about what they did to end up there. After much soul-searching and bonding, breaking down of barriers, they decide that one of them should write the essay for them all.

"Brian Johnson: Dear Mr. Vernon, we accept the fact that we had to sacrifice a whole Saturday in detention for whatever it was we did wrong. What we did WAS wrong, but we think you're crazy to make us write an essay telling you who we think we are. You see us as you want to see us... In the simplest terms and the most convenient definitions. But what we found out is that each one of us is ... a brain...
Andrew Clark: ...and an athlete...
Allison Reynolds: ...and a basket case...
Claire Standish: ...a princess...
John Bender: ...and a criminal...
Brian Johnson: Does that answer your question?
Sincerely yours, the Breakfast Club."

It just came into my mind

Ah. I see, Pettra ... Yes, I noted this thread had been shunted back to page three earlier but I also had one or more valued contributions during the show.

I'm enjoying the freedom of being able to craft the occasional thoughtful post, now knowing there are some fabulous bright minds to pick them up should the inclination take them. Not all forums appreciate or tolerate expansive posts, (or thoughts), but many of you folk write beautifully ... and I'm really happy I joined you.

LOVELY!

... and the quotes mesh into the theme of this thread like a hand in a glove.

Reading it made me break into a great big smile.

Well, as I don't feel able to write a suitable response to your wonderful posts (which I'm thoroughly enjoying reading by the way ), I feel John Hughes won't mind me stealing from him just this once

Nite all. Thanks for thinking.

Glad to oblige! Nite Muggins.

Archtypes, with their would-be roles and behaviours, seem to always be a feature of BB. I think HMs are recruited to carry out their designated missions, although few HMs will be aware of this. BB even go as far as trying to plan tasks around what they think their archtypes aee and, therefore, how they predict they should behave. BB still seem keen to recruit on this basis, even though a number of archtypes don't wash with the viewers anymore, such as the 'village idiot' archtype. 'Evil villain' will soon become problematic because they won't automatically be disliked by the viewers anymore.

It's all old hat for me as I have never really reacted to or judged HMs based on these labels, especially not when BB aims to ram these labels down my throat. Quite often BB gets the supposed label wrong, anyway, so it becomes a hopeless pursuit. I don't think genuine people are so one-dimensional that they could live up to their archtype, unless they want to wear their label like a badge of honour. I guess some HMs might try to use their apparent archtypes as an easy method of winning, but I think it's only the natural 'walking stereotypes' that stand a chance of managing this and a lot of viewers, these days, find such people cliched and boring. Others will use fakery and game-play, and try to dangle a persona in front of the viewer, so, again, their archtypes should be dismissed as unreal.

This year has seen the first Mother/Daughter dynamic, which is surely much deeper than a grasping-at-straws archtype and is something that I can believe in and also roughly relate to (how should a boxer or model act, for example? I harbour no fixed idea myself). It was interesting that these real roles were not widely credited as being grounded in reality, but they were treated more like an constructed 'house-style' relationship. I feel that the 'twins' thing is not really an archtype, because I think you are just a twin, like you are young or old, male or female, it is what you are, so it is interesting that it already feels so old. Perhaps we find it hard to separate what is authentic from what BB wants us to perceive.

If you're wondering what I'm doing awake at 3.30am. It was this silly idea to babysit 3 sets of babies.

I have a legitimate excuse for being up also, Urbane. I've just had to shoo away a cat that attempted to attack the pair of fledgling gull chicks I'm currently surrogate father to. They are in my big, walled garden, quite happy and now just about big enough to very nearly fend for themselves ... and they both flew about 20 metres over the potato patch earlier today ... just about 18" off of the ground.

Thanks for your measured and considered thoughts. Yes, I suppose you right. BB must go for specific character types to get the mix they imagine they want every year. I just thought that this year was Archetype Central!

I'd like to comment further on the twins thing though. (You state you don't think twins are archetypes?)

In my mind, the mention of Twins immediately brings up images of the Zodiac symbolism, itself connected with a mythological pedigree that probably makes Twins one of the most commonly used, (and feared) iconic figures in human history. Gemini were the twins from ancient mythology and twins, as a symbol, also represent good and evil, right and wrong, Black and white, etc, etc

What symbol could be more dynamic, so easily conceptualized and in your face than the stark vision of two potential outcomes, two opposing images or two conflicting sides to the same thing.

Also, Romulus and Remus figure prominently as twins suckling from the wolf on many Roman coins. I field walk, find and collect Roman coinage and artifacts and have scores of Constantine coinage of around 330 - 360AD, many with such an inscription on their face.

The Ying and Yang symbol, (I'm guessing, not Googling), probably represents some aspect of the twin archetype, as a symbol or icon, if not as a living representation of something.

Don't quote me on that though. A sleepy :sleep:

Edited this post a few times. Typos etc,

Good Morning, Beach...I, too, have birds: chickens of various sizes - and cats - plus a hearty crop of potatoes. They have been excellent this year.

Quick, let's form a new prototype and take over BB...

Having read this again, I get the distinct feeling that the cat isn't yours!

I can see the wider-context and value of the twins' symbolism, but I see them first and foremost as humans, who share the same genes, before I see the images that they could raise in theory. I have two twin boys, you see, identical, or they were, and I never treat them as anything iconic. It's just what they are; they are remarkable for it, but not in an abstract way that can really live up to an archtype. But I see now that you are thinking poetically, rather than literally.

Sam being deaf or hearing impaired is also a sort of label that I think the show wants to hang a coat on, unfortunately. I say this because BB often seems to select somebody who, on paper, and in BB's mind's eye, is going to have an extra challenge to overcome. I don't think a disabled person is an archtype at all. Again, I think a disability is a part of who you are, but I think BB hopes to cast anyone who has a disability like it's a role to be played within the house. They maybe see this archtype as a 'champion' for coping in the face of 'adversity'. So far Sam is just being himself in all his glory, which is great and is exactly what I would expect, because I don't see how anyone who has a disability can live up to a role. There is no role. BB should start to understand this. They will claim they do, but I still see them trying to create this 'plotline' of somebody overcoming their difficulty to, supposedly, win against all the odds...Rather than just win by doing what the hell they like.

If he hadn't Pettra i would have. I book marked it yesterday so i could bring it to the top of the pile again. It is so refreshing to have an interesting thread which I hope will become a little oasis to hide from the more partisan threads that are inevitable at this point of the series.

Also I notice we haven't yet attracted the attention of some of the other posters who take a more objective, balanced or academic approach to the show. I am hoping some of them will pile in too.

Good morning Urbane. Good morning An.

Utterly shattered.

Again at about 6am. All hell letting loose in the garden.

The routine is ... dive into slippers, grab umbrella, run down garden, shoo cat away, avoid dive bombing mother gull attacking me, (presumably protecting her young) ... SO WHY AM I HAVING TO DO IT??? Ha ha

Dive back into conservatory, take off slippers. Step in gull poo left by young chicks who have decided to explore Beach cottage .... sigh ... and then ...

Well, and then decide to make coffee, right off idea of expecting any more sleep ... and somehow get myself freshened up for booked client. (I work from the cottage).

Jeez.

Yes. Read your mail but haven't the energy to apply brain and respond just yet.

Have a great day, both.

Beach

I don't think that can be literally true, but it is a poignant thought.

Ha ha, yes. That would be brilliant. Disconcerting though.

YES! Of course housemates can take them by surprise: they probably didn't envisage, for example that 'spoilt monster' Gina would drop almost all of the act quite early on or that Dexter would be so enslaved (or that cheeky Sam would become so low-spirited and isolated ) but DEFINITELY housemates are brought in to play a role and that role is carefully enhanced. And yes, it is very rough for those who are chosen as the villain from day one. Alexandra, for example, should never have been on BB: she admitted herself that she hated living with other people, and her joyless, puritanical version of Islam was always going to clash miserably with the other housemates; but they wanted a villain, and edited her VT (I assume; no one could possibly be that unremittingly horrible) to show her as arrogant, agressive and thoroughly dislikeable, so she came in to a storm of boos. They then did a big twist to save her from being first out, because they were not ready to let the villain go just yet. It could not possibly have ended well for her, and it didn't.

This year, the tasks have been wildly uneven, as they were in the last CBB. Chosen 'big characters' (Gina) get big tasks; people they can't really be bothered with (Sophie) get risibly poor tasks; the twins get little showcases to be funny with. We all know that Sophie would not have got the knife throwing task, Gina would not have got the riddles task, and Hazel, say, would not have got the 'hold a stuffed duck and a swimming ring' task.

Great post WonkyD and one I can fully understand Afraid some of the other contributions on this thread are a tad over my head, but food for thought nonetheless