Question Time tonight

[weltweit]

Would you fight her?

I would prefer not to have to approach her at all, even listening to her on QT was a trial!

 

[Fez909]

Why is David Starkey famous? He's one of those people whose name I hear but don't know who he actually is.

 

[Supine]

Lol. The prog after QT 'Hello, welcome and if your watching in Birmingham salam alekham'

 

[sim667]

Why is David Starkey famous? He's one of those people whose name I hear but don't know who he actually is.

He wrote some history books and made some documentaries about histories.

I don't really know much about him, but afaik he's a solid reputable historian, but in everyday life, a bit of a cunt.

 

[Fez909]

He wrote some history books and made some documentaries about histories.

I don't really know much about him, but afaik he's a solid reputable historian, but in everyday life, a bit of a cunt.

Yeah, I Googled him and saw he wrote some books. I wondered if there was more to it.

Any of them worth a read, then?

 

[free spirit]

He wrote some history books and made some documentaries about histories.

I don't really know much about him, but afaik he's a solid reputable historian, but in everyday life, a bit of a cunt.

IIRC he's a bit of a maverick in the history stuff as well.

 

[JHE]

Why is David Starkey famous?

He became famous as the "rudest man in Britain" for his performances on Radio 4's The Moral Maze. His posture was as a right-wing libertarian. His manner was arrogant and bullying to the people interviewed and contrasted greatly with the kindly rabbi who was also on the panel. This opened the door to his career as an enthusiastic, highly confident, opinionated and slightly camp TV historian.

 

[Fez909]

He became famous as the "rudest man in Britain" for his performances on Radio 4's The Moral Maze. His posture was as a right-wing libertarian. His manner was arrogant and bullying to the people interviewed and contrasted greatly with the kindly rabbi who was also on the panel. This opened the door to his career as an enthusiastic, highly confident, opinionated and slightly camp TV historian.

Ah. That's the sort of thing I was after.

I suspected there must be more to it than just writing some popular hisotry. Thanks.

 

[bemused]

He wrote some history books and made some documentaries about histories.

I don't really know much about him, but afaik he's a solid reputable historian, but in everyday life, a bit of a cunt.

I find him interesting. He came from a pretty poor background, is gay, had polio, suffers from two deformed feet and earned his way into Cambridge.

The rudest man in Britain before twitter he's the early model for Katie Hopkins.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Damn the French journalist on this week is getting right on my wick.

 

[sim667]

Damn the French journalist on this week is getting right on my wick.

I don't think she got her point across very well, but I don't think the others, including the presenter helped that particularly.

I kind of see hr point, I kind of see there point, but the magazine clearly polarised some people before, and the aftermath of a abhorrent attack still polarises people after.... The cycle repeats.

 

[weltweit]

I thought she was good, in contrast to the comedien who was vacuous, she simply spelled out how Charlie Hebdo's continued representations of the prophet are offensive to a group of people and that repeating them is still inflammatory. However I think Portillo said Charlie had no choice but to repeat them as to do otherwise would be to submit to terrorism.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

I thought she was good, in contrast to the comedien who was vacuous, she simply spelled out how Charlie Hebdo's continued representations of the prophet are offensive to a group of people and that repeating them is still inflammatory. However I think Portillo said Charlie had no choice but to repeat them as to do otherwise would be to submit to terrorism.

Well yeah that's obvious. Of course it's offensive to a group of people but those people need to get over it, frankly. I agree that the comedian was vacuous but the French woman didn't seem to get Charlie Hebdo, evidenced by the fact she was complaining about the racist imagery used to depict a French politician without understanding it was used to satire racists. She also kept saying how 'this is something people hold dear to their faith' again, so? Maybe she was just shit at articulating her point but it did irritate me.

 

[DotCommunist]

david strarkey is an obnoxious rent a cunt whose blatherings post-2011 riot were unreconstructid scientific racism

 

[Pickman's model]

I find him interesting. He came from a pretty poor background, is gay, had polio, suffers from two deformed feet and earned his way into Cambridge.

The rudest man in Britain before twitter he's the early model for Katie Hopkins.

he',s not the rudest man in britain, he"s not even made the shortlist since 2009.

 

[bemused]

he',s not the rudest man in britain, he"s not even made the shortlist since 2009.

This is true, I meet ruder people than him most days

 

[Voley]

I got bored about halfway through last night but it was pleasing to see that Starkey couldn't survive on bluster alone. Its rare to see someone lose the audience so quickly.

 

[J Ed]

He wrote some history books and made some documentaries about histories.

I don't really know much about him, but afaik he's a solid reputable historian, but in everyday life, a bit of a cunt.

There is a site of interest to Tudor historians in Sheffield, I was speaking with its custodian about a year ago. He is deeply into the historical side of things but absolutely refuses to meet with Starkey, whenever he comes to the site he takes the day off.

 

[Sirena]

I got bored about halfway through last night but it was pleasing to see that Starkey couldn't survive on bluster alone. Its rare to see someone lose the audience so quickly.

I was watching a really good detective programme and I flipped across to watch Question Time. Bad decision....

 

[CNT36]

Well yeah that's obvious. Of course it's offensive to a group of people but those people need to get over it, frankly. I agree that the comedian was vacuous but the French woman didn't seem to get Charlie Hebdo, evidenced by the fact she was complaining about the racist imagery used to depict a French politician without understanding it was used to satire racists. She also kept saying how 'this is something people hold dear to their faith' again, so? Maybe she was just shit at articulating her point but it did irritate me.

Bloody Frogs not understanding French culture.

 

[weltweit]

Well yeah that's obvious. Of course it's offensive to a group of people but those people need to get over it, frankly. I agree that the comedian was vacuous but the French woman didn't seem to get Charlie Hebdo, evidenced by the fact she was complaining about the racist imagery used to depict a French politician without understanding it was used to satire racists. She also kept saying how 'this is something people hold dear to their faith' again, so? Maybe she was just shit at articulating her point but it did irritate me.

You would have thought being a fluent French speaker she might have gathered the racist cartoons were not racist.. not having seen them I don't feel I can comment.

 

[nino_savatte]

He wrote some history books and made some documentaries about histories.

I don't really know much about him, but afaik he's a solid reputable historian, but in everyday life, a bit of a cunt.

"Solid and reputable"? By what criteria do you judge Starkers' reputability? He's a Tudor historian afaik and it's little wonder that he sounds like something from a bygone era.

 

[nino_savatte]

I like starkey. He is very intellectual and generally argues a point the others don't get. It comes over wrong sometimes but that's because the others lower the intellectual level of the discussion.

Define 'intellectual'.

 

[hash tag]

Like I said earlier Starkey is a misogynist. Amongst other things, he told an academic friend of mine that she had no place at work and that she should be at home raising children!

 

[SpookyFrank]

I find him interesting. He came from a pretty poor background, is gay, had polio, suffers from two deformed feet and earned his way into Cambridge.

None of which precludes his being a nasty, bigoted sack of goat shit.

 

[bemused]

None of which precludes his being a nasty, bigoted sack of goat shit.

No doubt he can be highly objectionable.

 

[sim667]

"Solid and reputable"? By what criteria do you judge Starkers' reputability? He's a Tudor historian afaik and it's little wonder that he sounds like something from a bygone era.

I'm just assuming, I don't know much about older history tbh....... If I'm completely wrong on that then fair play.

 

[contracycle]

Starkey's historical analysis is heavy on "great man" concepts and dismissive of mass movements, class politics etc. He tends to depict a world in which the mass of the people are passive to the point of invisibility, while powerful and important men make all the running.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Turned off last night's episode as soon as the first question was asked.

Free speech is great, but what limits should we place on free speech to ensure that I personally am not inconvenienced by it?

*applause*

 

[scooter]

Yeah I just started watching it and got annoyed by the first question which seems to contain a lot of assumptions:

"Free speech is good but where do you draw the line before it becomes harmful and offensive?"

Offensive? Um you don't draw the line before it becomes offensive. Offensive is fine.

Combining harmful and offensive as though they're the same thing.

And "Free speech is good"? As if yada yada free speech is ok I guess as long as no one minds what you say, as long as you don't say anything contrary to my religion