Guest post by Thomas Fuller
Well, with the calming passage of 24 hours, let’s take another look at the 10:10 video showing the splatterfest of gore as skeptics play the more volatile roles from the worst portions of the movie ‘Scanners.’
It’s still disgusting.
I spent four years in the Navy and have seen a lot. The film did not upset me physically or emotionally. My reaction was mental (Cue Michael Tobis: “See? Fuller’s going mental…”)
What disgusts me first is its target. The video is meant for the young. Young people get blown up by a calm and engaged teacher in the first scene, and music and sports and film figures appealing to the young are both victims and perpetrators throughout.
Our reaction is irrelevant. They are not talking to us. They are talking to our children.
What are they saying? That it’s okay to ostracize, bully and dismiss those who don’t agree that climate change is uber alles (Oops! Godwin alert, Godwin alert) and that skeptics or the children of skeptics are fair game for… whatever.
As there is no real attempt at humour in the video, there’s no point in pretending it’s a parody. It’s instructional. It’s not even aimed at helping children work towards reducing emissions. It’s about helping children take aim at those who do not.
This is worse than Orwellian, although Eric Blair would certainly understand the meaning behind this message. And I don’t want to (and internet traditions would forbid me in any case) link this to the propaganda tactics of World War II. So somewhere in between those two, there is a special place in hell reserved for those whose intent it is to legitimize the cruelty of children towards each other based on what has evidently become a religious belief. And I hope that none of the film’s makers reaches that special place ahead of their allotted timespan–but I hope they get there.
Joe Romm and Bill McKibben have already announced they are ‘Shocked! Shocked!’ that gambling is going on in their casino and that their perpetual campaign of invective and calumny has produced people who actually believe them and hate skeptics. So I guess it’s no harm, no foul. Just as it was not their fault when a disturbed environmentalist took hostages at the Discover Channel headquarters, just as when the WWF made an ad showing planes flying into New York skyscrapers, just as when a Greenpeace blogger told skeptics the world over that ‘we know where you live.’ And as Anthony Watts knows full well, they also know where you work. But none of this is the fault of those who whip up the frenzy and the furor of those stupid enough to believe their hyperbole, enough to do something vicious, cruel, stupid or illegal.
So I guess I can’t blame hysterics like Romm and McKibben, who spend their days babbling about hell and high water and related mystical miseries, for any of the troubles we’ve seen. Except for the kids who will be downloading that video tonight. Both William Golding (Lord of the Flies) and J.M. Barrie (Peter Pan) knew full well that children need no help in being cruel. But this gives them license and legitimacy. And for that, Joe and Bill, I do hold you responsible. You sent the message first–it took years for 10:10 to make it explicit.
Thomas Fuller http://www.redbubble.com/people/hfuller
Thomas Fuller href=”http://www.redbubble.com/people/hfuller
” just as when the WWF made an ad showing planes flying into New York skyscrapers,”
I work in advertising and I know a scam ad when I see one. The WWF poster does not look like a genuine WWF ad, rather one an advertising agency slipped in under the radar in an attempt to gain recognition at various industry awards shows. I believe a branch of the WWF OK’d the ad, but I wouldn’t great store by that, there are ways of blagging stuff through a client. It did not get wide print exposure, which suggests no real media budget, and the work itself suggests a very small production budget, exactly what you expect when an agency does this kind of thing “pro bono-ish”
A few years ago there was a video on the internet of Honda’s Asimo robot falling over during a demonstration, I thought it was funny, showed it to one of my Japanese co-workers (I work in Tokyo), he found it sad, like a watching a child fall over. I feel the same about this film in a way, not for the makers, but reading the attempts to rationalize it on blogs and the Guardian. It’s just sad, the debate can do better than this.
Islam spread and almost conquered the known world because of this sequence:
Say “Allah is the one God and Mohamed his prophet” and be saved. Otherwise “off with your head”. Swords were cleaner.
The simple difference between this and Monty Python is Python did not have an overt or covert political agenda.
jeremy of W.A. says:
October 1, 2010 at 9:26 pm
Go and view Monty Python and the holy Grail. Look up Satire in the dictionary. Then take a course in being British (N.B. work very hard on the Irony / Sarcasm section)
Finally review the video again and posit a new opinion.
I’m not in the least surprised that the majority of Warmists who have a problem with this are American, as are the majority of Climate Realists.
It’s a cultural thing.
Well, as one Brit/Pom/Limey who grew up on Monty Python (OK, so I was at University of Bristol when Python began), I truly understand satire, irony and sarcasm from a UK perspective – or at least as expressed by the verious genius comedic wits that eminated from Oxbridge in those years.
This is something completely different (sorry to paraphrase but hard not to) – this is sinister in the extreme.
History is replete with zealotry emanating from beliefs (as opposed to known truths).
We have seen so many attrocities in the name of religion, the Inquisition, The Malleus Maleficarum that culminated in the Salem trials, many 20th century topics just too horrendous to mention, religeous fundamentalism, McMarthyism that ostracised so many patriotic Americans who’s only sin was freedom of thought and expression – the list goes on and on
How many wars have been waged in the name of Religion? It doesn’t even need to be different religions – Christian on Christian is always good for a bloodbath.
To all these must be added the religion that is now CAGW – the loonatics are taking over the asylum – and don’t care what they do or who they hurt in the process.
One question I have every time – is the cure worse than the predicted disease?
From one Brit who knows when to laugh – and when to be ashamed!
Andy
I haven’t previously commented on this, since I did not want to raise this **** to a stature worthy of comment.
Of course it is clearly marketed at kids, ie., the internet generation.
Those involved in the making and marketing of this video could not see the harm that it would inflict since they are too close to the cause to be objective; it was like preaching to the converted. In matters of this kind (PR matters) it is always a good idea to run it past the opposite camp to see what comments arise and then to take these on board if a more impressive product is to be created.
I am English and I consider that I have a good sense of humour, but I did not find the video at all funny. The joke was old (Monty Python has long since done the blowing up of people joke), and the same and only ‘joke’ was repeated 4 times. You might laugh once at a person slipping on a bananna skin but you will not laugh 4 times when you see the same gag repeated over and over again; am I the only one who does not find ‘You’ve been framed’ funny. There is only a certain number of times that you can be amused by people falling down. tripping over (weather on the dance floor or otherwise), falling into water. Same O same O.
Further, and this surprised me the most, that apart from the first scene there was no effort to put forward a message relating to how one can go about reducing one’s carbon foot print. The video was not at all educational and herein lay one of its biggest problems. Since it did not seek to teach how one could contribute to reducing the CO2 footprint, the only message left was that if you disagree with me, I will kill you.
I think that the video would have been less shocking and come into less criticism if through out it had sought to suggest practical ways in which an effective reduction in CO2 could be achieved.
What worries me is that there is no such thing as bad publicity and the reaction to this video on the web will have encouraged more of the target audience (the young internet generation) to watch the video to see what all the fuss is about and it is likely that that target audience won’t be digusted by the underlying message that if you disagree with me it is OK for me to kill you.
For jeremy of W.A
Well I am British and naturally love and enjoy Blackadder, Fawlty Towers and Monty Python. Like all the other Britons on here, I don’t find this even remotely amusing. I was absolutely incensed and I have written a strongly worded email to Tottenham Hotspur Football Club (whose team I’ve supported for 45 years). The parallels to “The Eternal Jew” are too strong to ignore (you are not one of us and therefore are only vermin to be eradicated). Moreover THFC has always been known as a Jewish club whose supporters call themselves “The Yids”. For them to loan some of their players and staff for this mini film is beyond belief. The message of “The Eternal Jew”
ended up at gates marked “Arbeit Macht Frei”. This film is essentially no different. Its utterly appalling and it’s makers should be prosecuted.
Paul Deacon Your attempted defence of this video by suggesting that Curtis and 10:10 somehow have diffenerent agendas doesn’t stackup when you look at what Curtis says in interviews he has made since.
eg
“Richard Curtis, is equally proud of the production: “The writer of Four Weddings and a Funeral and Blackadder and an early 10:10 supporter, acknowledges that the 10:10 film is very direct.”
“The 10:10 team are a fearless, energetic bunch, completely dedicated to getting the public fired up about climate change. They also turn out to be surprisingly good at blowing stuff up,” he said.”
This clearly shows they are “on the same page” with this rubbish.
My problem is that the video in question was designed to be shown in schools. Not for adults, but for year 9 science classes. It contains no ‘science’, so what’s it’s point? If my children were still this age and I found out such material was being used in their classes, there would be several stiff letters to the local education authority, and demands to the school board to dismiss those responsible.
Have formally written to my UK MP and MEP’s asking that they investigate. Have further requested that funding for similar organisations to 10:10 is withheld until a full enquiry into the matter has been held. Not that the powers that be will actually do this, but I just couldn’t resist the opportunity.
As for the flaccid attempts to compare the video to Monty Python, Blackadder etc. I would like to make the point that comedy violence has to be heavily stylised or it’s just not funny. Perhaps the director and production team did not understand this basic principle.
Comment for Toto:
Let me get this straight: Rwanda, Bosnia, Serbia, Cambodia belong on the same list as the US Civil War? Lots of white people killing lots of white people in order to eliminate slavery in the US is the same as blacks killing blacks from a different tribe or Non muslims killing muslims, (or the other way around), or brown people killing brown people because they are middle class, or just to eliminate political opposition.
Well, regarding the US Civil War, I think I know which side Toto would have fought for.
I’ve managed to think of a pythonesque link, please bear with me and apologies to anyone offended by the religious analogies.
First it was the sin eaters and their carbon indulgences, now tytheing, what’s next, the Spanish Inquistion?
Nobody expects…, etc.
mrjohn says:
October 2, 2010 at 1:33 am
The simple difference between this and Monty Python is Python did not have an overt or covert political agenda.
Not to get OT or sidetracked, but as a humble undergrad at the time, I would have to say Python had a huge Political agenda – taking the p**s out of authority was on a par with what the Yanks and Timothy Leary were up to with their “Peace” protests – bring down the consevative institutions.
Come to think of it – this is where Greenpeace, WWF, et al came from !!!
Andy
“As there is no real attempt at humour in the video, there’s no point in pretending it’s a parody. It’s instructional”
Ha ha ha. Instructional? Are you serious?
There was clearly an attempt at humour. It was misjudged and poorly executed, but it was clearly an attempt at humour. If you think it was instructional, you’re flailing off into wild paranoia.
I’m afraid that many people have fallen for a old trick here – publicity stunt. By making a big thing about this and getting them to withdraw it is EXACTLY what they intended from the start! Can you people not see this? It’s used very often here in England – and people still fall for it. Here is the Daily Telegraph today, “The spokesman denied that the withdrawal was planned from the beginning as a publicity stunt.” That means it was!
We’ve had lots of these here. A few years back, a table football company (what you amusingly call ‘Fuseball’) said they were going to axe their ‘Subutteo’. There was outcry. Men (still remembering their childhood) were incensed. After a few weeks it was decided not to scrap Subuutteo at all! Well surprise, surprise! They never had any intention of doing anything of the sort, but it gave them game massive publicity and sales.
It doesn’t always work. Our principle chocolate bar here (Cadburys) this week tried a similar stunt. We suffer from political correctness here terribly, mostly at the hands of the European Union (EU). One of the ways that the EU try to make our lives worse is to insist on eurosizing. This is where grams and kilograms are obligatory rather than pounds and ounces. Cadburys most indignantly stated this week that there famous tag line ‘A glass and a half of milk in every bar’ was going to be dropped, and would now be ‘The equivalent of 426ml of fresh liquid milk in every 227g of milk chocolate’. Thing is, few bought the stunt because the Trading Standards Institute stated that they in fact had no legal problem with the original description, and that Cadburys had taken it upon itself to put out that statement.
So you see people (Anthony), it would have been better NOT to draw any attention to the 10:10 video. By doing so you have played perfectly into their hands, and are continuing to do so.
The 10:10 people desire to murder ALL people who don’t agree with their political view regarding climate.
“There are horrible people who, instead of solving a problem, tangle it up and make it harder to solve for anyone who wants to deal with it. Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.” – Friedrich Nietzsche
BrianMcL says: …. “Stand aside worthy adversary!”
Global warmer …. hop, hop, hop!
Another Brit here that didn’t find it funny. Not that shocking either, as we all know how anti-human the eco-warriors are too. Anyone who thinks its satire ought to re-watch it carefully. If it was satire the joke would be on the teacher (and other ‘authority’ figures). They would be the target of the piece. Satire is not satire unless the target is obvious. The whole point of satire is to exaggerate the characteristics of the target to its logical conclusion. So a satire of the teacher would involve her arriving at school in an SUV, dressed in fur, and telling the pupils to save 10% of their carbon emissions so she could go on driving her big car, and then blowing up those who disagreed. Thats satire. Merely proposing a sensible thing (everyone saving 10% of their carbon emissions) and then coldly killing those who disagree is not.
Ross says: ““The 10:10 team are a fearless, energetic bunch, completely dedicated to getting the public fired up about climate change.”
…. burn the witches!!! (?)
Come on, the best thing we could have done is to have said nothing. Global warmers always claimed to be the victim of the “oil conspiracy” out to silence them. Now it is patently obvious that they are the establishment figures in these videos trying to silence anyone who dares disagree with them.
If we had said nothing and let this film get out to the schools it would have turned the youth (and probably half the teachers) against the bullyboy global warmers and their fascist conformist ideology.
They have form with this. Not so long ago they produced a scare-film for children, where all the animal were drowning because of climate change. Not so shocking as blowing people up, but of the same genre. It was a hyper-distress film targeted at kids.
I cannot find a copy, they seem to have deleted it from YouTube . If you can find a copy, please post it.
And as I said before, you can make a formal complaint to the Met police under thie hate-crimes unit. It is a simple online form. You only need to have been going through London for this to be a Met police issue. Loki online under Met Police Hate Crimes unit.
They cannot prosecute, unless a certain number of complaints have been received.
.
I finally got around in watching the actual video, i got as far as 1 minute 20.
This would have been satire and therefore funny if the teacher name was, lets say miss “Teatime” (pronounced as Tea-ah-time-eh) and that she blew up the kids for not believing in either the Hogfather or the Tooth fairy.
This is not funny at al, its just a few steps from things that happend here in the Netherlands (and in the rest of occupied Europe) some 70 years ago, where kids at school where wondering why some of their classmates disappeared overnight and where never seen again.
10% solution: Religious excuse for murder, perhaps.
(from the SPPI link:) This is what activist film maker Franny Armstrong thinks about her work:
“Doing nothing about climate change is still a fairly common affliction, even in this day and age. What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet?”
How did she equate using something as innocuous as a bit of energy in daily life (that was put in place by the powers that be) with actions that threaten the whole planet (such as a nutjob with a thermonuclear device)?
Someone goes beyond mere activism, reaches deep into the pit of hate, and it gets pasted up on the Internet anyway.
Escalation.
Blowing people up is always humour, and never offensive. The next film will feature orthodox Jews being blown up by Palestinians. Or Kurds being blown up by Iraqis. Oh, what a laugh. And let’s teach this to our children too, as being the norm…. (sarc off)
They still don’t understand?
The Guardian has really lost the plot. They now have an article on Bin Ladens opinions on Climate Change right next to the “10:10” video.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/02/osama-bin-laden-climate-change
I am fairly certain that there is no example of a Monty Python sketch in which the the individual who dared to stand out against easy conformity was portrayed as the villian. I have always though the the Emperor’s New Clothes was a fundamental text for English satire, this production is the mirror image.
To those who are comparing it to ‘A Modest Proposal’ I’d say yes, you have a point but ‘A Modest Proposal’ was itself misunderstood and hence backfired
(Writing as an English woman of Welsh & Scottish ancestry)
The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley says:
October 2, 2010 at 1:57 am
The stunt was not over a marketing choice, and there are some things that cannot be kept quiet about.
Like allowing a group to single out a sector of society for extermination.
I’m also appalled at the poor English pronunciation of the schoolteacher – “..ge”ing your dad to insulate the loft..”etc. No wonder so many school-leavers are illiterate.
[regret some of us north of England folk do pronounce our words in such colloquial ways ~ac]