LAWSON If the style of 'Sit-Trag'... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Note that, throughout this programme, Lawson becomes more and more confident with that phrase he's invented. He started quite teasingly, testing the water. By this time he's virtually dribbling down his chin - almost as if, with every utterance, he can actually feel it physically entering the Oxford Book Of Modern Phrase he calls his bumhole.

	LAWSON ...owes a lot to what characters can now say, the 'look' of such series is also important to the changes in the form. Traditional sitcoms were shot with several cameras on studio sets in front of a live audience. And usually on a Sunday night. The day off for actors working in the theatre. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Equalling utter sileage, listeners.

	LAWSON But the new-wave of comedies is influenced by movies and documentary. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Which is better, obviously. Even if the movie is 'The Postman' and the documentary is ITV's 'Britain's Ugliest Faces'.

	LAWSON This is most obvious in 'The Office' with its spoof fly-on-the-wall approach, but eyes have been opened more generally, says Stephen Armstrong. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Again, what the fuck was 'The Comic Strip'? That was cinema for the small screen, with Peter Richardson becoming an obscure Italian director by series 5. Documentary spoofs are hardly new either – Kevin Turvey, Bad News, Paul Calf… 'The Rutles'. 'Happy Families' prison doc pisstake "On The Mangle" - which influenced the hell out of 'People Like Us' (Chris Langham pretty much recreating his presenter role from the former in the latter). In fact, 'Happy Families' in general. Each episode culling a vaguely different cinematic look - to fit the narrative rather than as a lame spot-the-reference exercise. Re the matter of embarrassment at social events. Wasn't David Nobbs' 'A Bit Of A Do' entirely modelled on that idea?

	ARMSTRONG Television's becoming... becoming intensely filmic. I mean, if you look at programmes like 'The Book Group' - they started off with the idea of multi-camera shots and then became a single film camera. And one of the beauties of film is you go right up to the eyes of the person - Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Not true at all. Compare the BBC original of 'Brimstone and Treacle' with Sting's film version. The studio-shot version may be safe and conventional, but - dramatically - you're there. And it's a thousand times more unnerving and effective for that reason.

	ARMSTRONG you can effectively see into their soul. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

But if it isn't 'real' film - the programmes under discussion here are all shot on videotape and in most cases are treated to look (rather unconvincingly) like film - then surely this comment is at best irrelevant and at worst alarmingly pretentious? Well there it is - the attraction of FRV explained totally. A mere glossing device to fool people. Of course you can't genuinely see into anyone's soul simply by using film (or FRV, or normal videotape or a fucking red plastic 3-D Disney Viewmaster). It can only come from the actual quality of writing and performance. But at least with a bit of fake film 'gloss' you can by-pass the latter a bit.

	CLIP OF 'THE OFFICE' - MORE OF HIM AND SWINDON 'NOT RACIST' SCENE - YOU CAN'T SEE INTO BRENT'S SOUL IN THE SLIGHTEST Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Not that we can see anything at all apart from 93.20 FM in digital writing.

	GERVAIS When Brent says something stupid and then looks at the camera... you're there! You go "Oh! He's looking at me! I can't help you!". And that's why you watch it through your fingers! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Maybe, by series three, we can go interactive by pressing the red button on our digital remote. And tell you to go fuck yourself. How many people actually laugh for this reason, anyway, as opposed to those who laugh simply because they find something funny? The few decent gags in 'The Office', for example Keith's appraisal meeting, have nothing to do with the thought processes outlined above. They're just good jokes cast adrift in a wishy-washy 'naturalistic' framework. I don't understand how Gervais can sit there and describe how people 'react' to the show as if he's talking about something he didn't write himself. I don't get the sheer bloody audacity of a bloke who can make that observation about "cringing through your fingers" when 'The Office' was sold to the press and public using that very by-line, which was then picked up as an easily quotable 'plastic opinion' by all and sundry. A marketing phenomenon - selling both a show and an accompanying truism to justify why you like it in one fell swoop. Extraordinary. Bet it catches on too.

	LAWSON The League Of Gentlemen are caught between the two traditions. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Yes! And that's their main problem! They can't decide whether to do a dark, subversive, turning-television-on-its-head series of dramatic one-off horrors or a brightly-lit, shrieking pepperpots sketch show. And I wish they'd make up their bloody minds about it.

	PEMBERTON Our preference as performers was to play to a studio audience because that's what we've been used to, y'know, doing the shows in Edinburgh, etc, and we argued quite strongly to do that, and to have the sets, and it was the production team who edged us towards it being more 'visual' and using single camera and using more locations, and now, thank goodness we did 'cos it's far stronger than... than it ever... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

That sentence died away a bit didn't it? With good reason. The deleted scenes presented on the DVD release of the first series, appear in the original videotaped format and actually look far more sinister and effective than the transmitted 'filmic' equivalents. If anything, they have a greater sense of realism - it's far more unsettling to see the material presented in the form of an ordinary 'traditional' sitcom. It's a case of the right 'feel' being weighed up against the stylistically impressive 'feel', and the latter being favoured because it looks slicker. At times, I like the style of the series. All the location shots are much improved by the addition of a fourth wall, and it really gives the series it's own distinctive style. The 'Pop' sketch from series one looks positively cinematic with its constantly sweeping cameras. But the studio shots (The Dentons, The Local Shop) look terrible with their fields taken out, because of the way they're shot with those hated multi-cameras and locked-off shots, whether there's an audience there or not. FRV only really works on location and only then when the script suits it. 'Phoenix Nights' worked because it was, for the most part, something different and something very funny. 'Spaced' didn't because it was a sitcom about two people sharing a flat, and would be much more watchable if shot in a 'Game On'-style. Interestingly, on the 'League Of Gentlemen' second series DVD there's a multi-angle feature showing what one of these interiors looks like before they add the effect. It looks fine, like a proper sitcom should. One DVD magazine said it "looked like Crossroads" but this isn't a bad thing at all. A few people used this example to 'prove' that field-removed is a good technique to use on modern comedy shows. But unfortunately the Gents have chosen to use more style than content, especially in the third series, and the team are always more likable when they're being low-budget. Listen to the radio show. That comes across as a jolly, '99p Challenge'-style affair with people behind desks doing silly voices and is much better for it, whereas on the TV shows they're more concerned with getting shot-by-shot reconstructions of old James Whale films rather than just doing joke after joke after joke as was on the radio. Another good example is the 'Christmas Special' DVD which I got for Christmas (I didn't ask for it. Got the 'Framley Examiner' book too) where all the menus are dark and atmospheric, accompanied with Papa Lazarou chanting and so on, but when an extra is selected it just shows a single camcorder image of all the Gents talking about anthology horror. It's really cheap and amateurish and for that reason much more endearing than seeing Reece Shearsmith blacked up and kidnapping a vicar. The out-takes on the DVD are good too. Because there's no real mistakes made on set it's really just eight minutes of rushes: clapperboards, establishing shots, unused cutaways. Fab. Shame it's for the 'League Of Gentlemen Christmas Special' rather than anything else, but there y'go.

	SHEARSMITH And we can't bear to have to cut... to go back to doing it... once we've done the majority of it in single camera, it's like from being with scalpels to... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Operating theatres.

	DYSON It's maddening... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Nut-houses.

	PEMBERTON Huge breast-strokes... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Norks.

	DYSON ...'cos you can be so precise... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Eating dead ants garnished with murdered children's pus. Um...sorry, I'll get back to you.

	SHEARSMITH Yeah, absolutely, suddenly you're expected to be able to know where... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Geography.

	PEMBERTON I... I love... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Being passionate about something. Um...sorry, I'll get back to you.

	SHEARSMITH ...five cameras pointing at you. It's ridiculous! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Five knobends pointing at you. It's ridiculous!

	LAWSON The greater visual realism of these comedies caused some problems for the recent second series of 'I'm Alan Partridge'. Many critics, and viewers writing to newspapers, thought that there was now a gap between the painful accuracy of the writing... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Partridge suddenly sounding Mancunian, utterly empty characters and no dynamics at all. Carry on, Mark.

	LAWSON ...and acting, and what felt like the artificiality of the studio laughter. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Meanwhile, many others thought that there was a gap between the publicity and hype, and the actual quality of the content of the series. The removal of studio laughter could not have compensated for this in any way. Must have been the retakes.

	IANNUCCI It actually came a surprise to people that the second series was done in front of an audience. (chuckling) In fact, quite a lot of people who've said to me "why's.. why is there an audience laughing at..." Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

You misheard, Armando. "Why is the audience laughing?"

	IANNUCCI ...are also the same people who said "because you didn't have an audience laughing at the last series!"... and... we did! (laughs, self-congratulatory) and they laughed just as loudly at the last series! But it's interesting how people's... expectations of comedy have really undergone a sort of radical change! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

IANNUCCI: Phew! Relax everyone, the tatty old content and empty plots have passed muster with that lot out there - again. No, Armando. All you've done is justify what is now regarded as a below-par series by claiming that there's been some ridiculous 'shifting in the sands' of comedy appreciation. That's absolute rubbish - and panders only to the smug idiocy of people who make shows like 'Front Row'. Here's an alternate hypothesis. Most people didn't question the first series at all, caught up as they were in a lovely cosy "hooray, we all agree that this is great" safety-in-numbers group-hug. Anyone who even vaguely questioned it was immediately shouted down. Everyone - from the media gits in Percy Street to the beer-spitting Paul Pisseds in the pub - revelled in being a small part of its overall success. Ooh, they loved it. Five years on - you come back with a second series and it misfires. Starts well though - the group-huggers echo your carefully-planted cry of "Back Of The Net!" and cluster together once again to 'share the moment'. But this time a lot more people do question the show. Even a lot of the people who loved the first series consider it somewhat disappointing and say so. They start getting the usual shout-downs from those fractured egos desperate for the shared hugs, but the whole hitherto unshakeable 'society' built around the series has started to crack. The reviewers do a slow-burning volte-face, from "Hoorah - Welcome Back Alan - Classic stuff!" at the start of the series to "Ohh... Dear..." by the end. The condescending glory-hunting bullies suddenly realise that the wind is no longer blowing as strongly in the right direction and, one by one, take a back seat until they can choose a suitable 'winning side' in the whole affair. Luckily for you, one or two people queried whether the laugh-track was present in the first series. This gets taken up by a few newspapers, blown into a 'story' and - hoorah and holay - you now have a convenient excuse to convince yourself and others that 'the plebs' who didn't like it don't know what the fuck they're actually talking about. Just an opinion of course. You could just as easily blame mice.

	CLIP OF 'I'M ALAN PARTRIDGE' - GRAVEYARD SCENE, SERIES 2 IANNUCCI Actually, if anything, the current series of 'I'm Alan Partridge'... actually feels more 'traditional'. Kind of, almost deliberately in the way we were doing it was sort of reaching back to your sort of 'Blackadder', 'Rising Damp', 'Steptoe & Son'... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

More of a shade of American sitcom influence, or was that just me? Check through the series again. I'll wager that there's at least 1 - 2 scenes in each show which are specifically there to act as no part of the overall narrative and which can be easily snipped out to accommodate a 24 minute TV slot without causing confusion. Alan talking to himself at the country club for instance. Or blethering to the builder about smoking/cancer. They'd have to lose the whole of the last eight minutes of 'Never Say Alan Again' then. The 'Spy Who Loved Me' re-enactment and that extraordinarily 'Roseanne'-like ending with the video night? Armando, in his quietest moments, must surely realise that the end result was shoddy. I can't believe he'll still be saying all this in a year's time. His honesty on the series 1 DVD commentary is rather disarming – ready to criticise the show a lot, and you end up knowing precisely where they were coming from and kind of accept it as well-intended whatever the after effects. If there are any hats left in London after March, I'll eat them if the series 2 disc has Baynham, Coogan & Iannucci gassing all over it.

	IANNUCCI ...that tradition was one where us writers sort of grew up on really so it was nice to do something that was actually... not intentionally bucking the trend but I think there was an air of...of us feeling 'no, we don't want to conform to the prevalent style' which is to have no laughs and for it all to be quite 'tragic'! There was always an air of defiance - "Sod the lot of you, we're gonna play it for laughs! And we really want you to laugh your head off at this!". Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Head defiantly remains on shoulders. I don't for a second believe that the team were aware of any sort of trend to "buck". Mainly because there wasn't one. But Iannucci seems now to be attempting to rewrite history in the face of Lawson's dribbles simply to make it look like they've always remained 'ahead of the game' and that - once again - everyone else is just too stupid to realise it. It's all self-preservational spin.

	LAWSON Beyond painful plots, verbal frankness and visual realism, this group of savage comedies also show a trend in personel. Most of the shows involve what David Brent's management courses would call 'multi-skilling'. Annie Griffin writes and directs 'The Book Group'. Dylan Moran co-writes and co-stars in 'Black Books'. Armando Iannucci shares the writing, directing and producing of 'I'm Alan Partridge'. Another talent taking home three paycheques is Ricky Gervais, who, apart from playing Brent, co-writes and co-directs, with Stephen Merchant, 'The Office'. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

This of course, puts them streets ahead of David Nobbs who could only write - we don't even know what his face might look like unless we looked at a picture of him! - or like The Pythons who gave their TV shows to other people to direct, who could (outrageously) do the job really well despite not being onscreen. Ian MacNaughton, R.I.P. Graeme Garden, Bill Oddie and Tim Brooke-Taylor wrote and performed 'The Goodies'. They were also heavily involved in the production of the shows. The majority of comedians have always written and performed their own material. I revise my earlier question - has Mark Lawson seen any comedy ever? There have been loads of people who write, produce and star in their own programmes. It's nothing new. As we said before, sometimes it's good to have someone from stopping these people from being too over-indulgent. There's no denying that 'The Office' would be a million times better if (for example) Bob Spiers had directed it. It's either/or with this lot though. The arrogance they display is astounding at times. They'd never even consider allowing Bob Spiers, John Lloyd or anyone with the vaguest avuncular comedy pedigree anywhere near their precious creations. Coogan was quite vitriolic towards Geoffrey Perkins for 'interfering' with his TV work. Fuck's sake, this is Geoffrey Perkins! Have some respect. The argument in favour of having a small team of people who understand each others' humour and vision is a good one, but without a strong father-figure who understands TV and who can translate that vision to a TV screen you're unfamiliar with effectively, all you'll get are a load of egos and misfirings. And excuses.

	GERVAIS It's... it's almost more like script-editing taken to the nth degree - we're cutting out the middle-man. Um, we already know what we want to see on telly when we write it, so it's just making sure that's what we get in the can. So, it's, it's... I mean, it's no big deal, having said that, it's a lot harder than I thought it was. And I'm never gonna do a fake documentary again! It's too hard! I'm just gonna film a closed-narrative comedy. You can do anything, go anywhere, anyone can walk in, and we don't have to worry about 'realism' or 'motivation' or 'possibility'. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

I didn't notice that he had. Was this recorded before series two of The Office?

	ARMSTRONG You can probably find the genesis in the early-90s in people... like 'On The Hour' and 'The Day Today' where you started to get groups of people who knew each other working together - one of them directing, one of them producing, one of them writing, one of them performing... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Didn't the people working on 'On The Hour' and 'The Day Today' contribute to everything to do with the show, hence the common credit 'Additional Material by The Cast'? Only the improvised sections. MacKichan, Front & Schneider were never writers on either series. Marber probably did a lot more on 'The Day Today' than his 4 mins of material for the whole of 'On The Hour'. Christ, even Andrew Glover wrote more than him. Armstrong's belief that everyone knew each other is ill informed too. Highly unlikely that he was a regular viewer of 'Up Yer News', at any rate! Iannucci threw everyone together and, yes, there are connections before 1991 but it's still a very fragmented family tree. They also hated to be considered a team, if you remember the Independent article from 1993. After these series they started to do the sort of combos he describes – 'Armistice', 'Brass Eye', 'Fist of Fun' – and it was going on well before, with 'Lionel Nimrod' and the like. This man has no sense of comedy history.

	ARMSTRONG ...and that, if you like, set them all outside, now a lot of those people - people like Linehan and Matthews began work in that field. There's probably, when you look... boil it down, about ten to fifteen people who began this and have now been spreading out and influencing others... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Unfortunately they've started employing the emulators, who do soundalike work with no heart or soul.

	ARMSTRONG ...and, er, fortunately influencing controllers as well! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

'Not Only But Also'. The Pythons in 1966 on 'The Frost Report'. 'The Good Life' cast in 'The Norman Conquests' in 1974. See also a million other examples that you, Stephen, know nothing about. This doesn't make any sense at all. Everyone involved in 'On The Hour' and 'The Day Today' had a distinct and clearly-defined role, and it was the combining and contrasting of the viewpoints of the core team - which, for 'On The Hour', numbered ten different performers and writers - that shaped the quality of the programmes as a whole. Quite what this has to do with a small team of people having absolute and total control over every aspect of production isn't clear. Is it really so good to 'cut out the middle man', given that sometimes middle men can have some useful ideas and suggestions to contribute? Would 'Not Only... But Also...' or 'Monty Python's Flying Circus' have been quite so outstanding without the additional influence of their strong producers? More to the point, doesn't the fact that 'On The Hour' and 'The Day Today' tower over anything that the 'multitasking' contributors have produced on their own seem to confirm the fact that collaboration has some considerable advantages over the 'present day' approach?

	IANNUCCI There's three of us who work on 'I'm Alan Partridge' - there's myself, Steve Coogan and Peter Baynham, and I'd say the contribution splits evenly three ways. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Three times nothing is still nothing.

	IANNUCCI I'm very much, sort of, the 'structure' person... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

IANNUCCI: Before Billy Sneddon the editor screws it all up. So, no, it's not my fault

	IANNUCCI Peter's very much the 'inspired one-liners' person... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

IANNUCCI: He's slightly mad, you know! Peter's inspired one liners? Hardly on the same par as "…with a face like Jools Holland", "dried up crackly knicker bacon" or scores of asides in 'The Harpoon'. Is he to blame for the line about "driving to Dundee in my bare feet"?

	IANNUCCI ...and Steve has his own... I mean, Steve never writes a word down physically, but Steve is able, in improvising and taking the suggestions, is able to... 'riff'... Alan... for hours on end in a sort of startling way, which is an enormous privilege to see on a, sort of, daily basis because, y'know, only 1% of it ever... ever makes it to the screen. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

IANNUCCI: Steve is a lazy toerag!

	CLIP OF 'I'M ALAN PARTRIDGE' - SERIES 2 - BLETHERING ABOUT 'ARCHERS' GERVAIS If people know what they're watching, and why they're watching it, they can enjoy it more. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Not necessarily. The by-the-numbers 'My Family' was nowhere near as enjoyable as the uncatagorisable 'Attention Scum', and I'd rather watch the constantly surprising Kenny Everett than punchlines-spotted-a-mile-off 'Big Train' any day. Punchlines? I must have missed those. Lots of good ideas, but too many of them in an endless quest for a gag.

	GERVAIS We don't want to confuse people... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Hence all the publicity which read "Look, it's an office! You all work in one of these! You all know someone like this! Switch off brain, it's nice comfy comedy!". And then see it come round again as a Real Media attachment of that twat off of 'The 11 O'Clock Show' doing a dance. Back to square one.

	GERVAIS ...or... or pull the wool over anyone's eyes, so they knew they were watching... a fake documentary about a bloke who they knew they were meant to think of as a 'twit'! And then, it's easy! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Zero depth, then? Esmonde & Larbey must be terrified.

	GERVAIS And, y'know, don't insult anyone's intelligence... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Do Tim and Dawn fancy each other then? I couldn't figure it out.

	GERVAIS ...don't try and... y'know, scoop the lowest common denominator up so it gets ten million 'cos you'll be doing something wrong! (aural grin) But people who only get three million always say bitter things like that, don't they? (Gervais and Lawson chuckle) We didn't want the other seven! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

GERVAIS: The Parkinson, Steve Wright et al appearances were just compleeeete accidents. We were only booked to link CeeBeebies between 'Pingu' and 'The Fimbles'. Oh yeah, and 'Front Row'. You lost over a million after Series 2, Show 1. Who were more interested in a Channel 4 documentary on the relationship between men and their penises. All that PR, all that BBC in-house publicity, all that spin designed to invite people to share in 'The Office's popularity... None of it really worked. You can talk-up a show until you're blue in the brain but, at the end of the day, you can't fool everybody. It's quite sobering.

	ARMSTRONG You can be more dangerous with a small audience on a smaller channel - certainly with the proliferation of satire from cable stations - people are prepared to accept far smaller viewing figures because they know there are few people watching television. I mean, I would say that 'The Office' could now play on BBC 1! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

No it couldn't, you ignoramus. Reactions to it would be like 'h&p@bbc', only even worse. A last episode would struggle to go out before midnight.

	ARMSTRONG The figures it was getting towards the end were respectable BBC 1 prime-time ratings. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

No they bloody weren't. Three million. Maybe four. Not even close.

	ARMSTRONG 'The Royle Family' transferred very successfully from BBC 2 to BBC 1. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

One, and only one, example. Porridge went from BBC2 to BBC1, following its pilot. Python went the other way for Series 4 - the only example of this?

	ARMSTRONG And so, I think that you... it is true that... that people are prepared to accept lower ratings to make a programme a success, but I also think it's true that the mainstream Saturday night audience is probably brighter than people have given them credit for in the past... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

The majority of Saturday night mainstream TV is occupied by 'Pop Idol'-type shows - designed for a media-savvy audience, but made by people who know that audience will still happily put their blinkers on for the evening. 'Yes, we know Simon Cowell doesn't really hate Dr Fox - it's just an act, I'm not stupid! Now, if you'll excuse me - Boo! Mr Nasty! Quick, what's the phone number for Channel 4's Worst TV Lamp-posts poll?'

	ARMSTRONG ...and people thought "well, you put together a variety-style show and bung it out on Saturday night and that's what people want", but I think the British public is an intelligent public and does want some... intelligence from its television! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

'That Was The Week That Was', 'The Two Ronnies', 'Dave Allen', dozens of sitcoms, blah blah blah. You actually hate what ordinary people might like, Armstrong. People like Stephen Armstrong (and programmes like 'Front Row') are attempting - be it through insidiousness, self-congratulation or just plain ignorance - to redefine what constitutes 'intelligent'. No different to the way 'Big Brother' apologists attempt to defend it as a fantastic 'cultural event'. Also, everything here boils down to the need to grab 'likely' shows from the massive soup of current programming and to stick little tags on them so they fit nicely onto the big hypothetical coloured wallchart of 'ver media'. Thus: 'The Office'="this year's big success"; 'Orrible'="this year's big failure"; David Brent="carrying the mantle of great sit-com characters of the past"; Chris Morris="enfant terrible who dares to say the unsayable"; 'Dead Ringers'="comedy". Etc, etc... They need to fill all the 'defined spaces' on that wallchart or it'll look like something's missing. As we said ages back, without an 'Alan Partridge' they'd need to find a new hero to elevate. In his five year absence they found David Brent. The group-hugs are enveloping it as we speak. The only consolation is that it won't last. Give it five years and absolutely no-one will still be 'eagerly awaiting' another series of 'The Office'. Give it five months in fact. And they all know this. They know that 'hero status' is no longer made to last, which is perhaps why there's such a frantic rush these days to define something half-good as a 'classic'. Just another artificial feel-good device designed so that everyone can be 'part of the moment' before the whole thing starts to deflate and fly haphazardly around the room.

	GATISS When you're making a six-part series, even... unless you're gonna do a different half-hour every week, you've got to start thinking about those things because you want people to get the benefit of watching all six. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

The video age caused a major shift in this attitude to detailed programme making. Twenty years ago. It's also been commonplace in TV drama and radio drama for time immemorial.

	GATISS You want some progression, you want a storyline to develop and... and what we've tried to do over the three series is to push that more and more so there's much more of a narrative, 'cos people really respond to that. It becomes more like a soap than a sit-com. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

And has ended up with about as much humourous content as the average soap opera. GATISS: Well? Did you spot that red carrier bag every week? No, we don't know what it meant either! Ho ho!

	LAWSON The genre of 'Sit-Trag' raises in two senses the question of 'how far can you go?' In terms of material and tone, the answer seems to be that there are no limits and taboos, except perhaps for paedophilia and the holocaust. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

SEINFELD'S GIRLFRIEND WITH A REALLY ANNOYING LAUGH: (switching on TV) Oh great, Naked Gun is on - I love that movie! SEINFELD: I believe "Holocaust" is on. These subjects can be successfully covered in TV comedy. Alan Bennett's 'Playing Sandwiches' was an excellent TV programme on paedophilia, albeit not a comedy. 'Life Is Beautiful' is a wonderful comedy film about the Holocaust in which the main character (an Italian Jew) is shot by a Nazi. Following Lawson's theory it would have been widely canned. In fact, it won three Oscars and numerous other awards. There's no reason why a television programme on this subject could not be successful. It would just need that essential element of any good TV comedy... a good script. Usual undercurrent of 'of course' with Lawson there, suggesting he doesn't distinguish between mere subject matter and the target of gags. Also, he's obviously forgotten about both the 'Brass Eye Special' and that German sitcom about Belsen, both of which he waffled on about on 'Newnight Review'. Also, sketch shows of the past have frequently done paedophilia/holocaust jokes. It's just that they were about 'scout masters' and comedy Hitlers. "Dee-dah-dee-dah, Uncle Mike Stand - hoo-ray!"

	LAWSON The other spin on the question is how long a series should go on. At which point does originality become repetition? John Cleese, who ended 'Fawlty Towers' after two series, is usually regarded as the one example of leaving the audience wanting more. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

See how he alludes to the hackneyedness of the argument, thus allowing him to still use it? The journalistic equivalent of people who think inserting the words 'the proverbial' into a cliché stops it being a cliché.

	GERVAIS I think we'd push the envelope of reality a little bit with a... a BBC film crew hanging round a Slough paper merchants for ten years! It certainly hasn't got ten series but... however much you think you know David Brent you only met him for three hours. How well do you know someone after three hours? Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Quite well if those three hours are a selection of moments from their life specifically written to show 'what kind of person they are'.

	GERVAIS So, er, I think you can know him for six, and maybe nine. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Do you need help with moving those goalposts, Ricky? You were saying stop at 12 episodes last time. Let's see: Channel 4 chat-show - Nearly three hours. '11 O'Clock Show' - probably a lot more than that. Total: Lots of hours. OK, you can piss off now. The latest is that he's aiming for 'another two hours'. So not so much 'Fawlty Towers' as 'The Fast Show' then.

	GATISS We're gonna do sixteen! (Gatiss laughs) It's a bold move! DYSON Gonna be like 'The Goodies'! SHEARSMITH Heh heh! PEMBERTON It's... I mean, it's very different to a traditional sit-com because, y'know, in a sit-com you have to return to the status quo really - to carry on, to keep these characters in this location, to keep them in the situation that the comedy comes from... LAWSON Well, you can blow them all up if you... PEMBERTON We can do what we want, yeah, we can... SHEARSMITH Several times over! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Like 'The Goodies', like 'Blackadder', like 'Bottom', 'The Fast Show'… Lots of things.

	PEMBERTON ...bring new people in... So we don't feel constrained by that. We don't know if we're gonna do a fourth series... but if we do, it'll... we'll try and make it different enough so that... people can see that we are moving on and we are pushing in different directions. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

PEMBERTON: We have run out of ideas big time. Yes, that's what I want out of a comedy show - I want to turn the TV on and say 'ah, I see they're pushing in different directions'. Because, you know, I often think that when I'm watching tapes of 'Comic Relief 3 - The Stonker'.

	IANNUCCI It's funny - there was a five-year gap between this series and the last series and... and in that five years you forget how much it's grown in people's heads, so that when you start to make new series you suddenly realise it's... it's quite a big phenomenon you'll be dealing with and suddenly... you're being held responsible... heh heh ... for, for what millions of people are expecting! And woebetide you if you get it wrong. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

IANNUCCI: We got it wrong.

	IANNUCCI And... that's not really fun... anymore. And I think there's no point in making something if it's not fun. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

In that case, wouldn't it have been more sensible to make something new? 'The Armando Iannucci Shows' was great. Series two of 'I'm Alan Partridge' was not. In those five years there have been several repeat showings and video/DVD releases. Why should it "grow in people's heads" if they can watch it whenever they wish? Iannucci seems to be suggesting that people are looking back at the original series with rose-tinted glasses. "Woebetide you if you get it wrong"! You got it wrong five years ago you silly sod!

	ARMSTRONG Recently there's been an assumption in British television that what we need to do is copy the Americans - get gangs of people together in rooms and not let them out until three days later when they've written thirty six episodes. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Er, 26...

	ARMSTRONG But British television, overall, if you speak to British people at the moment, um, like the people at Talkback and Harry Thompson behind 'Have I Got News For You' - he finds taking scripts to British television comedy commissioning executives, they want star names attached - they say 'well it's gotta have Johnny Vaughan in it...' Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Still? After 'Orrible'?

	ARMSTRONG '...or Davina MacCall in it'. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

'Sam's Game', presumably. Ah well, these shows aren't coming back anyway, everyone knows this - we've had an assembly about it. Its stars are doing well enough on other shows, more's the pity. No sneering BBC2 documentary about their envy and bitterness, eh?

	ARMSTRONG But, occasionally you find someone who will credit the writer. And that's really... the key. The key is not that we need to get a thousand writers together in a room. What you need to do is find a 'good writer' who can write 'great comedy'... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Hmm, now, I reckon there's an article in there somewhere. About three fucking years ago.

	ARMSTRONG ...and that's what we're very fortunate to have at the moment. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

We could call it "Stephen Armstrong Is Wrong"...

	LAWSON Does it export - The League Of Gentlemen? DYSON Yeah, it does... PEMBERTON Yes, in brown paper parcels! GATISS It does ver... apparently, extremely well. We... we get the traditional cheques for three and a half pee from Bratislava... er... PEMBERTON Poland... DYSON Singapore... PEMBERTON Estonia... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

"Everybody's talkin' 'bout pop music..."

	SHEARSMITH Iraq! GATISS Very big in Eastern Europe. SHEARSMITH America... France... DYSON Iceland... PEMBERTON Canada... DYSON Australia, it's big... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

The next poster slogan of the Australia Tourism Board, there.

	GATISS Let's just list some countries! Apparently, no, yes, it's... LAWSON Do you know what the American reaction is though? Wh... where does it play in America? PEMBERTON It's on BBC America... SHEARSMITH It was on Comedy Central... DYSON A lot of comparisons to... Monty Python... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

*spunk hitting the fan*

	GATISS (American accent) "Monny Pythaarrn..." Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

No. 'Pythonesque' humour, at least in the world I'm proud to inhabit, is a very specific label - pertaining to a very precise tone. The "And on BBC1, me telling you this"-ness of it all. The "silliness and lunacy" Armstrong mentioned earlier are neither here nor there - it's the richness of the material, the fact that the jokes are often over before they've registered properly. "And don't forget to join us next week when International Wife Swapping will be coming live from my place." It's THAT. Americans have never understood this aspect of Python; the Brits used to, but not any more. And the League Of Gentlemen, with their heavy-handed, under-written shows, haven't a bloody clue.

	DYSON ... and to 'The Kids In The Hall' as well, they compare it to... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

*spunk hitting a fan with a slightly different plug*

	GATISS Yeah... DYSON ... which is their Canadian sketch show isn't it? PEMBERTON But a lot of it's pixilated - when they had it on Comedy Central. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Even the bits that don't need to be? Like the local shop? Facking mad.

	PEMBERTON Also they had to cut it down from thirty minute episodes to twenty two minute episodes, so they made two extra episodes! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

This is interesting, if strange. The DVD has two title cards for these new episodes.

	GATISS It was incomprehensible... PEMBERTON It was suddenly an eight-part series! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

This is just to bump the episode count up for syndication, surely? Wouldn't the edits have been exported in that form?

	GATISS Incomprehensible! DYSON We didn't even understand it! Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Facking mad! Sounds to me like they've heard the famous story about fourth-series Python being re-edited into something unrecognisable by American TV and enjoy having their own equivilent to talk about in interviews. The slight difference being that the Pythons cared so much about it that they took ABC to court over the butchery and effectively disallowed them from showing anything with the name 'Monty Python' on the station ever again. Put in the same position, would The League Of Gentlemen (or indeed anyone on Lawson's jizz-list) ever consider this as an option? Whether they cared passionately about the re-edit or not? I don't think so. Far too much overseas publicity at stake.

	GATISS I think that... some of the 'broader parts' - 'local shop' sort of area - everyone can relate to that, no matter where you are. So, er... SHEARSMITH We had a woman on the Golden Rose of Montreux team who... what was she? OMNES Swedish, Swiss, Swish... SHEARSMITH She said, um, "we have these local shops - these Tubbses..." PEMBERTON "...in Stockholm!" ALL LAUGH Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Facking mad!

	GATISS ...so everybody's experienced that feeling of going into a shop and feeling suspicion. LAWSON As far as the success of 'Sit-Trag' can be understood, it worked because it took risks of content and tone.... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Past tense now? That was a short revolution.

	LAWSON And because writers and producers had sensed that, in these 'dark times'... Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Yes, the world's much blacker in 2002 and aren't we brave and important, with September the 11th and Saddam Hussein on our plates, doing our daring material about George Bush having a bouncy White House? Because nobody had anything to be depressed or angry about in the past did they? The Goon Show team losing half their friends in battle? Lightweights! And they were incwedibly wacist, too, actually. When you look at it.

	LAWSON ...the definition of what could make us laugh had stretched. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Can't agree with this. This implies that the only popular comedies today are these non-existent 'Sit-Trag's'. What about 'The Simpsons'? 'Look Around You'? 'Harry Hill's TV Burp'? 'Shooting Stars'? Popular comedies which are funny simply because they have a nice, jolly, happy atmosphere. Even Gervais' inspiration 'This Is Spinal Tap' had a happy ending. This is what no-one remembers, that Spinal Tap had a decent plot, some hilarious non-sequitur scenes and a decent ending as the band gets together again and becomes 'big in Japan'. Gervais' tape must have stopped after the band split. That would explain everything, if he thought that all great comedy documentaries ended unhappily with the characters all redundant and unloved. And this is the main problem with what Lawson defines as 'exploring darker feelings in comedy'. The truth is they're not "exploring" anything at all. They're just pointing a camera at some characters in unhappy situations and saying "look at that - aaaah! - didn't expect that did you! Not in a comedy at least". What's so innovative about any of it? Remove the 'morality tale' aspect from any dramatisation - comedy or otherwise - and you effectively remove the point. Everything shifts from the characters on your screen to the intentions (and egos) of those who actually created the situation - i.e. the writers.

	LAWSON Yet, even in the form's most painful moments, such as the sacking of David Brent in 'The Office', there were links with more old-fashioned British views of humour. GERVAIS We just think West Country accents are funny! I apologise now to anyone west of Slough... on the map, but we just think they're funny. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

David Quantick is a superb, perceptive writer who should....oh, THAT kind of funny. Don't worry, the rate you're going, you'll be able to do Pakis by next year.

	GERVAIS And because we're sort of nailing people who, um, have got their platform suddenly and are saying things they think are, y'know, wit and wisdom... just to add to that (West Country) "a bit of a burr, loike"... we think's hilarious, which is, y'know, regionalist, and I apologise, but y'know, "if you're talking about Plato, or, y'know, Socrates n'that... it sounds daft dunnit." CLIP OF 'THE OFFICE' TALKING ABOUT DOLLY PARTON'S TITS Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

Has anyone heard that record from 1981 by Ronnie & The Rollbacks called 'I'd Love To See That Dolly Parton's Tits'? I do love the 80s.

	ANNOUNCER Ricky Gervais, as David Brent, ending that Front Row 'Sit-Trag' Special. The programme was presented by Mark Lawson and produced by Helen Thomas. Front Row - a 'Sit-Trag' Special BBC Radio 4, 7.15pm, 27/12/02

...and you can catch a repeat run of both series of 'The Office' every night over Christmas and New Year. This has been a load of promotional hot air dressed up as something more profound. Back Of The Net! STOP PRESS: Jane Root who didn't even like the bloody 'Office' until she saw how it upped the profile of her channel is now "determined" to squeeze a third series of it. Ah well - what else would the versatile Soho Jethro himself, Ricky Gervais, be doing instead? This sort of thing, presumably: THE 11 O'CLOCK SHOW TalkBack Productions/Channel 4, 20/04/2000 [Having been introduced by Iain Lee and Daisy Donovan, Ricky Gervais enters to applause and The Stranglers' Nice N Sleazy. He sits.] GERVAIS: Well, it's nearly the end of the series [Series 4], and - you've gotta look forward to your next job in telly, y'know? It's a cut-throat business. And I'm a little bit worried that this show hasn't really shown my intellectual side. [Looks to audience for a reaction of "Ho ho because you're avowedly not 'er...playing' that sort of character"; instead the response is utter tumbleweed. It could almost be a realistic BBC2 spoof documentary] IAIN LEE: [makes meaningless 'weighing it up' gesture with his hands] There is that, yeah. GERVAIS: So I'm gonna leave you two muppets be'ind.... [Audience ripple because of word 'muppet'] .... DAISY DONOVAN: Oh are you? [IAIN LEE raises eyebrows and does that face] GERVAIS: ...And try and get on to summat more serious like Newsnight and Paxman, or Equinox... LEE: [painfully aware he is reading out a feedline] Right, so you reckon you could actually be involved in investigative journalism? GERVAIS: Well, I've already started, my little Hugh Laurie-faced geek... [LEE pulls an "Oh purleeeeeeze, stop, my sides will split" face] LEE: Very funny. Ro-LAND! [Quoting Janet St. Clair] "I want to help you, Ro-LAND!". GERVAIS: "Just say no", aah. There's a story in the paper today, right? Apparently, there's people defrauding the benefit office pretending they're disabled when they're not. Now, I've always said this - When will the authorities listen to me? Anyone can put a tartan blanket over their legs and wheel themselves down to the dole. [Seven people, at the very very most, cackle] I've done it. [Mugs at audience - maybe one-fifth laughs] I didn't wheel me'self, my girlfriend wheeled me...well, with her 'ead, 'cos she 'ad her arms up the back of 'er jumper, like that... [Demonstrates, after a fashion] Etc. Yeah, he should be able to squeeze 'another two hours' out of that, no problem...

Rantings, armchair sociology and dismay
from Bean Is A Carrot, Bent Halo,
Joe4SOTCAA, Mike4SOTCAA,
The Mumbler, Squidy,
and TJ Worthington

Comment: Sit-Trag

Page 1

Page 2

Page 3