Jeeves and Wooster annoyances...
Nepheus Spodei
Well, after completing "The Inimitable Jeeves", "The Cat-Nappers", and
some of "Right-ho, Jeeves!", I have noticed what isn't quite right (in
my muddled brain) about the shows... I think they do a nice job of
combining/splitting stories, but here's the problem: they make useless
and stupid changes, for no reason whatsoever. For instance, the ship
Claude and Eustace were supposed to be on is "Edinburgh Castle", but it
was changed to "Pride of Natal" in the show. Why?! There isn't any
possible reason for this! Ah, the stupidity of PBS sometimes... back to
the old eyes and brain to read ALL the books... thank God for the
library!
John
--
Spamkiller in use. Please add an "n" (minus the quotes) to the end of my
username (the part before the @) to reply. Sorry it's so rotten, but
simplicity rules... :-)
Springfawn
my theory about this is that those poor blighters and chumps at pbs never
actually READ a P.G. wodehouse story in their puny lives. i mean to say, dash
it, how could they have? perhaps they pay some down-at-the-heels grad students
to read them and then give synopses of some kind. these grad students, as many
of us know, live on a shabby diet of beans and coffee, with the occassional
cigarette thrown in for vitamins. thus they cannot be expected to remember the
name of that lovely boat and much of the master's snappy dialogue. it's a
shame and a pity, but there it is.
or we could always chalk it up to the Fourth Dimension, which, as we can tell
from these postings, is responsible for Many Unexplained Phenomena in life.
forgive the grammar and what not, please,
i am the dramatic equivalent of a grad student.
pip-yawn-pip
Corky Haddock
Sailesh Krishnamurthy
Nepheus Spodei wrote:
> Claude and Eustace were supposed to be on is "Edinburgh Castle", but it
> was changed to "Pride of Natal" in the show. Why?! There isn't any
> possible reason for this! Ah, the stupidity of PBS sometimes... back to
Possibly to indicate that the twins were being packed off to South Africa ?
--
Cheers
Sailesh (http://www.meer.net/~sailesh)
Ph: (408) 257-7314
DronesClub
> these grad students, as many of us know, live on a shabby diet of beans and
coffee, with the occassional cigarette thrown in for vitamins. thus they
cannot be expected to remember the name of that lovely boat and much of the
master's snappy dialogue. it's a shame and a pity, but there it is. or we
could always chalk it up to the Fourth Dimension, which, as we can tell from
these postings, is responsible for Many Unexplained Phenomena in life. <<
Hey! As one of those grad students (once upon a happier time, before such
things like Work were invented), I am unfortunately called upon to speak
harshly to Miss Haddock. Any grad student can tell you that you can live quite
nicely on spaghetti without contracting scurvy, and scheduling undergraduate
tutorials during the dinner hours is a free source of protein, as an obliging
youth will always offer to put your dinner on their meal plan, in exchange for
pearls of wisdom on bureacratic structures and organizational theory.
However, regarding the original grumble, I am in complete agreement. The Jeeves
& Wooster chaps (can't blame it on PBS; we must blame our English cousins for
this one) really made too many changes and sucked all the wit and fun out of
Wodehouse. The producer was the same chap who did the Hercule Poirrot episodes,
and I have to give him credit for near perfect 1920s settings & so forth.
Dashed fun to watch, even if they are off-key.
-Dunstable
Nepheus Spodei
Well... I believe Aunt Agatha did mention that they were going there in
the episode anyway... which brings me to another gripe: why change the
actors and actresses so bally much?! There are 2 Madelines in those that
I've seen, 2 Gussies, 2 Bingos, 2 Aunt Agathas, 2 Aunt Dahlias, 2
Stinkers (I think), 2 Stiffys... why?
Not that I don't enjoy the shows; as a matter of fact, I really like
them a lot, but come on, they could use a good reading and some
consistency!
Mark H. Brady
Nepheus Spodei wrote:
> Not that I don't enjoy the shows; as a matter of fact, I really like
> them a lot, but come on, they could use a good reading and some
> consistency!
My biggest gripe about the TV series is when have Bertie and Jeeves jump
overboard because Jeeves cannot think of a way out of the situation. Maybe I
missed something in the books but...
Mark
Ern
Nepheus Spodei wrote:
>
> Well, after completing "The Inimitable Jeeves", "The Cat-Nappers", and
> some of "Right-ho, Jeeves!", I have noticed what isn't quite right (in
> my muddled brain) about the shows... I think they do a nice job of
> combining/splitting stories, but here's the problem: they make useless
> and stupid changes, for no reason whatsoever. For instance, the ship
> was changed to "Pride of Natal" in the show. Why?! There isn't any
> possible reason for this! Ah, the stupidity of PBS sometimes... back to
> library!
>
mind,
though, is an insoluble one: a televised or filmed story lacks Bertie's
narration, which is more than just one of the charms of the novels and
stories. It's an essential part of the fabric. Part of the genius of
Edward Duke's one-man show _Jeeves Takes Charge_ was that he not only
appeared as Bertie (and all the other characters), but he narrated the
action.
Straying a bit further afield, I would claim that a large part of
Wodehouse's
genius is that he always finds the perfect narrative voice. He tells a
story one way as the omniscient narrator at Blandings Castle, another
when
the narrative voice is Bertie Wooster's, yet another when the Oldest
Member
tells the story, a fourth way in the one story that Jeeves narrates,
etc.
And the way in which he tells the story is so perfect for the story that
the whole thing collapses without it.
I'm not idiot enough to claim that this is "the most important" facet of
his art. It seems to me that trying to find a most important facet is a
lot
like trying to decide whether the height, breadth, or depth of a
rectangular
parallelipiped (better known as a box) has the most to do with its
volume.
Take away Wodehouse's dialogue and the art vanishes, as well. But The
Master's
narrative talent is second to none.
Ern
The Haleys
Well, let's see. This episode combined the short stories "Bingo and the
Little Woman" and "Jeeves and the Greasy Bird." Bertie had to wriggle
out of an engagement to Honoria, which he did by hiring Trixie Waterbury
to pretend to be his fiancee. Then he had to extricate himself from the
spurious "engagement" to Trixie, or face the perils of a large breach of
promise payment and/or being dealt with by Porky Jupp, the all-in
wrestler. Then he had to explain his Rosie M. Banks impersonation to the
real R.M.B. and to Lord Bittlesham, his/her greatest fan. In the
original stories, the resolutions were as follows:
1.Blair Eggleston, Honoria's former fiance, came to Bertie's flat and
was confronted by Trixie; he had already been going to tell Bertie that
the Wooster/Glossop nuptials were off, as he and Honoria had reconciled.
2.Jeeves and Aunt Dahlia between them convinced Trixie's "uncle," Jas
Waterbury, that Bertie was actually indigent; that Jeeves, so far from
being a valet, was actually a bailiff's man; and that Bertie was
dependent on Aunt Dahlia for every scarce penny he had to his name - in
other words, a pigeon not worth fleecing.
3.Jeeves explained the Rosie M. Banks impersonation to Bingo's uncle by
saying that Bertie was simply off his head.
>From a TV viewpoint, I'd say that 1 and 3 are definitely on the weak
side. 2 might have been interesting, but is slightly talky. In any case,
each of these would have necessitated its own scene, so that the episode
might have seemed like an endless stream of plot resolutions. Believe
me, that sort of thing can really drag on screen.
I wish Exton had come up with a slightly less ridiculous device than the
man-overboard one - Wodehouse's plots are improbably but not frankly
impossible. But there's no denying he tied up all the loose ends with
one quick visual stroke, which is more important from the strict TV
standpoint. And at the risk of restating the obvious, these are TV
shows we're talking about.
Either one is willing to accept that a TV or film version won't be like
a book, or one is not. If one is not, the best thing might be to avoid
them altogether. Perhaps Wodehouse is not ideal for adaptation, given
the central role his narrative plays in his works (especially the
Bertie/Jeeves novels). I will be the first to admit that the Granada
series can't approach the genius and sheer funniness of the books. But
I'd hate to have missed out on the many pleasures of the TV version.
Another post mentioned Edward Duke's wonderful Jeeves Takes Charge. I
adored this production. However, what works for a two or three-hour
theatrical version would become tedious on a weekly TV series. Imagine
watching an actor - I don't care how wonderful - standing (or sitting)
in front of a camera talking at us, telling us the story. Great as
reading, acceptable as theatre, very poor as TV. The only other option,
voice-over, was apparently considered for the series and discarded for
reasons of pacing. Watching a screen is a passive activity and demands
something lively to look at by way of compensation. I suspect that
Wodehouse himself, if he were doing the adaptations, would realize this
and make some changes.
Again, just my two-cents'-worth.
Peggy
Briarpatch
Ern wrote:
> Part of the genius of
> Edward Duke's one-man show _Jeeves Takes Charge_ was that he not only
> appeared as Bertie (and all the other characters), but he narrated the
> action.
Well, I suppose you could call it narration.
He recited the short story, "Jeeves Takes Charge," word for word. Act
Two (when I saw it, anyway) was the vodka-in-the-orange-juice drunken-
prize-giving scene, recited from the novel.
It wasn't a dramatization of Wodehouse. It was a reictation of
Wodehouse.
It reminded me of a speech class that I took in college. Not terribly
different from acting, but not the same thing as acting.
However, we are definitely in agreement that Mr. Dukes' stage show,
"Jeeves Takes Charge," was brilliant.
Billy Green
Beach the Butler
John writes:
>... which brings me to another gripe: why change the
>actors and actresses so bally much?! There are 2 Madelines in those that
>I've seen, 2 Gussies, 2 Bingos, 2 Aunt Agathas, 2 Aunt Dahlias, 2
>Stinkers (I think), 2 Stiffys... why?
>
Here we come to a difference between British and American Television
series. The fact is that the British tend to rely on only one writer
(or occasionally a small team). The resultant scripts are then filmed,
usually over a course of months. The time from inception to completion
of a series is around 18 MONTHS, and that series usually contains only
six episodes.
If (and it is usually an IF) there is another series, arrangements
have to be made to re-engage the actors and actresses that were in
the previous series. If there is a problem with one (or more) of the
stars, this may lead to a change in the timescale to accomodate them.
If there is a problem with a minor character then they just find
another actor.
Let us look at the comedy series Red Dwarf. It has recently celebrated
10 years since the broadcast of the first episode. In this time there
have been 7 series (only 44 episodes). The three main characters (Cat,
Rimmer, Lister) have been played by the same actors throughout. But
there have been 2 Krytens, 2 Hollys (1 male, 1 female), and at least
3 Kochanskis.
So that's the explanation. The British aim for quality rather than
quantity in their TV shows, including their comedies. And considering
these are the people who brought us Monty Python, Fawlty Towers, The
Good Life, To the Manor Born, Red Dwarf, Men Behaving Badly, Chef!, The
Vicar of Dibley, Absolutely Fabulous, etc., etc., it would be a brave
butler who dared to criticise.
Beach. The Butler's Pantry, Blandings Castle
cuth...@no.spam.leeds.ac.uk
> Here we come to a difference between British and American Television
There was an article last week in the Daily Telegraph from the pen of
the author of Men Behaving Badly who made very much the same points.
Ben.
Marilyn Weyman Kegg
Beach the Butler wrote:
> So that's the explanation. The British aim for quality rather than
> quantity in their TV shows, including their comedies. And considering
> these are the people who brought us Monty Python, Fawlty Towers, The
> Good Life, To the Manor Born, Red Dwarf, Men Behaving Badly, Chef!, The
> Vicar of Dibley, Absolutely Fabulous, etc., etc., it would be a brave
> butler who dared to criticise.
>
> Beach. The Butler's Pantry, Blandings Castle
Oh Beach! Finally, to know that there is someone else out there who liked To
the Manor Born! I loved that show dearly and hated to see the end of it!
How I wish I had it on tape!
Coming out of hiding,
Roberta Wickham
(Yes, it is really I... the terror of the Junior Lipstick!)
Beach the Butler
Bobby Wickham writes:
>
>Oh Beach! Finally, to know that there is someone else out there who liked To
>the Manor Born! I loved that show dearly and hated to see the end of it!
>How I wish I had it on tape!
A show that was neglected for a long time by the BBC, they have recently
re-shown it on BBC Prime. It never achieved cult status, because it was
very popular at the time. However people then seemed to go through a
period of political correctness where the upper-class heroine's total
snobbishness was looked on unfavourably. I reckon that "To the Manor
Born" is worth another look, not just for Penelope Kieth's bravura
performance, but also for her bridesmaid's (was it Angela Thorne?)
beatifully understand acting.
Although, speaking as a butler, I would hate to work for
Mrs. fforbes-Hamilton.
Beach. The Butler's Pantry, Blandings Castle.
Anne Cotton
When one is discussing wizard British comedies, how can one possibly
overlook "Keeping Up Appearances" (I mean, are Daisy and Onslow to be
believed?), and "Waiting for God" (when I grow, finally, Old, I want
to be Diana Trent!).
Lady Bassett
Susan Collicott
Marilyn Weyman Kegg <mwey...@erinet.com> writes:
>
> Oh Beach! Finally, to know that there is someone else out there who liked To
> the Manor Born! I loved that show dearly and hated to see the end of it!
> How I wish I had it on tape!
Not to worry, my dear - there are many of us out there! I adored To the
Manor Born, myself.
How I wish I had it on tape, also!
Aunt Susan
Susan Collicott play:ca...@serv.net work:su...@nwnet.net
If you were dirt upon a road, in sultry summer weather, I'd be a cloud
and rain on you, and we'd make mud together.
Augustus Fink-Nottle
Susan Collicott <ca...@itchy.serv.net> wrote:
>Marilyn Weyman Kegg <mwey...@erinet.com> writes:
>> Oh Beach! Finally, to know that there is someone else out there who liked
>>To the Manor Born! I loved that show dearly and hated to see the end of it!
>> How I wish I had it on tape!
>
>Not to worry, my dear - there are many of us out there! I adored To the
>Manor Born, myself.
>How I wish I had it on tape, also!
>Aunt Susan
I say, I was rather a child when it ran, but I remember watching it
religiously every week. Loverly. I don't quite remember all the characters
now, but that gel was rather spiffing, what?
Ahh... To the Manor Born. Where have those lovely shows gone?
On a similar note, has 'Yes, Minister' seen the light of day in recent
years?
toodles,
Gussie
tyler hower
Susan Collicott wrote:
> Marilyn Weyman Kegg <mwey...@erinet.com> writes:
> >
> > Oh Beach! Finally, to know that there is someone else out there who liked To
> > the Manor Born! I loved that show dearly and hated to see the end of it!
> > How I wish I had it on tape!
>
> Not to worry, my dear - there are many of us out there! I adored To the
> Manor Born, myself.
>
> How I wish I had it on tape, also!
>
> Aunt Susan
>
> Susan Collicott play:ca...@serv.net work:su...@nwnet.net
> If you were dirt upon a road, in sultry summer weather, I'd be a cloud
> and rain on you, and we'd make mud together.
Just this past weekend I was minding my own b. when the postman brought me as an
especial treat from some concern--I think it may be a man of questionable
circumstances under a marquee in the Covent Garden--yclept 'Brittania', which is
quite proud to offer videotaped versions of To the Manor Born. If it is of any
help, they can be reached by p. at Box 64413, St Paul MN 55164-0413. Perhaps they
might be persuaded to bung a c. your way. There were several other rather enticing
comedies on offer.
Yours faithfully, etc.,
Percival Mulliner
awaiting the school holidays
john becker
Augustus Fink-Nottle wrote
> Ahh... To the Manor Born. Where have those lovely shows gone?
> On a similar note, has 'Yes, Minister' seen the light of day in recent
> years?
Ah, there is an advantage to living in the Great White North
after all. <Yes Minister> runs on PBS every Sat eve out of
Burlington Vermont (or is it Plattsburgh, N.Y.?). I say, young
Fink, I'll rent you viewing rights on the couch.
Ta -John
George Cyril Wellbeloved
Augustus Fink-Nottle, guzzling the orange poison, spake thusly:
> Susan Collicott <ca...@itchy.serv.net> wrote:
> >Marilyn Weyman Kegg <mwey...@erinet.com> writes:
> >> Oh Beach! Finally, to know that there is someone else out there who liked
> >>To the Manor Born! I loved that show dearly and hated to see the end of it!
> >> How I wish I had it on tape!
> >
> >Not to worry, my dear - there are many of us out there! I adored To the
> >Manor Born, myself.
> >How I wish I had it on tape, also!
> >Aunt Susan
>
> I say, I was rather a child when it ran, but I remember watching it
> religiously every week. Loverly. I don't quite remember all the characters
> now, but that gel was rather spiffing, what?
>
> Ahh... To the Manor Born. Where have those lovely shows gone?
> On a similar note, has 'Yes, Minister' seen the light of day in recent
> years?
>
> toodles,
> Gussie
Ah yes, my memories of "To the Manor Born" also comprise exclusively of the
above-mentioned gel.. Rather a pippin, what? Speaking of Messrs. Hacker, Appleby
and Woolley, I hear of them frequently making an appearance on PBS. But maybe
that's just "Yes, Prime Minister", as I've been quite unsuccessful at hunting down
tapes of "Yes, Minister" ... those blighters at amazon.com list them as "hard to
find".
Speaking of British comedies , does anyone remember "Mind Your Language"?
Nostalgia and all that sort of rot, I agree, but it was the first of the genre
that I was exposed to, and thought it was quite a corker. Especially the French
au-pair and her off-colour jokes. Put it down to my youth ...
Cheerio,
George Cyril Wellbeloved (http://people.netscape.com/rajesh)
"Be thin in your thought and your body'll be fat;
If you wear your hair long you needn't your hat."
- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Marilyn Weyman Kegg
Is it possible that there was a web site or 800 (and now we have to say and/or 888)
number associated with said merchant? If so, I should love to have it so that I might
order TTMB for my leisurely viewing pleasure forthwith.
Toodle Pip,
Bobbie
tyler hower wrote:
> Susan Collicott wrote:
>
> > Marilyn Weyman Kegg <mwey...@erinet.com> writes:
> > >
> > > Oh Beach! Finally, to know that there is someone else out there who liked To
> > > the Manor Born! I loved that show dearly and hated to see the end of it!
> > > How I wish I had it on tape!
> >
> > Not to worry, my dear - there are many of us out there! I adored To the
> > Manor Born, myself.
> >
> > How I wish I had it on tape, also!
> >
> > Aunt Susan
> >
Bianchi
Susan Collicott <ca...@itchy.serv.net> wrote:
Marilyn Weyman Kegg <mwey...@erinet.com> writes:
>
> Oh Beach! Finally, to know that there is someone else out there who liked To
> the Manor Born! I loved that show dearly and hated to see the end of it!
> How I wish I had it on tape!
Not to worry, my dear - there are many of us out there! I adored To the
Manor Born, myself.
How I wish I had it on tape, also!
Aunt Susan
Greetings: I have a catalogue calledBrittania that has to the Manor Born; The
phone# is 1-800-778-7007. I haven't used them but you might call. Helpfully,
Lady Constance They have Jeeves and Wooster too.
Susan Collicott play:ca...@serv.net work:su...@nwnet.net
If you were dirt upon a road, in sultry summer weather, I'd be a cloud
and rain on you, and we'd make mud together.
Bianchi mrbi...@worldnet.att.net
"Quality brings long term profits to any computing endeavor"
Beach the Butler
Lady Bassett writes:
Oh I agree, but if one were to include in the list all the good
comedies produced by the various British television companies over
the years, the list would become unwieldy.
Not to mention the arguments that would start over whether to
include such "gems" as (shudder) Benny Hill...
Sailesh Krishnamurthy
George Cyril Wellbeloved wrote:
> above-mentioned gel.. Rather a pippin, what? Speaking of Messrs. Hacker, Appleby
> and Woolley, I hear of them frequently making an appearance on PBS. But maybe
I have thus far been unsuccessful in finding Yes Minister and YPM on PBS. The British
Council in Chennai (or Madras) used to have exactly 2 videos - Equal Opportunity and
The Greasy Pole. I must have seen both umpteen times :-)
For a book that was written after the TV serial, I found the book absolutely
hilarious. Different things to laugh at, definitely.
> Speaking of British comedies , does anyone remember "Mind Your Language"?
Extremely funny, although I only got to see it on video and not on the weekly sunday
telly.
Beach the Butler
Sailesh writes:
>George Cyril Wellbeloved wrote:
>
>> above-mentioned gel.. Rather a pippin, what? Speaking of Messrs. Hacker, Appleby
>> and Woolley, I hear of them frequently making an appearance on PBS. But maybe
>
>I have thus far been unsuccessful in finding Yes Minister and YPM on PBS. The British
>Council in Chennai (or Madras) used to have exactly 2 videos - Equal Opportunity and
>The Greasy Pole. I must have seen both umpteen times :-)
>
>For a book that was written after the TV serial, I found the book absolutely
>hilarious. Different things to laugh at, definitely.
Not that I want to make anyone jealous, but BBC Prime (the sattelite thingy)
has just shown ALL the Yes Ministers, and has just moved on to the Yes Prime
Ministers. This week's episode was the one where he succeeds in getting
someone to cook his lunch, but only at the cost of buying Trident missiles.
Seems like a lot to pay for lunch, but there you go...
Incidentally, I'm not sure how much people are aware that the series used
many real-life situations, even though they were never spotted as such
because they were so farcical. There was once a Home Secretary who refused
to consider a member's request for a review of a judicial case. Not very
unusual, but the request for review was made as a written question, and
there was some delay between the question being tabled and the answer
being delivered. During the delay there was a general election, and the man
who had tabled the question returned to the House as (you've guessed it)
the Home Secretary. He then refused to grant his own request. This was
used in Yes Minister when Jim Hacker wanted to dispose of a petition that
he had started before he was in government.
In another real life instance, Edward Heath wanted to pay a ten pound
"christmas bonus" to all pensioners, but was continually told by the
civil service that it was not possible in the time. He got round this by
announcing the bonus on television and telling the nation that he wasn't
sure that the civil service could manage it, but they had assured him
they could.
They did.
Bianchi
mbia...@worldnet.att.net (Bianchi) wrote:
Susan Collicott <ca...@itchy.serv.net> wrote:
Marilyn Weyman Kegg <mwey...@erinet.com> writes:
>
> Oh Beach! Finally, to know that there is someone else out there who liked To
> the Manor Born! I loved that show dearly and hated to see the end of it!
> How I wish I had it on tape!
Not to worry, my dear - there are many of us out there! I adored To the
Manor Born, myself.
How I wish I had it on tape, also!
Greetings: I have a catalogue called Brittania that has To the Manor Born; The
phone# is 1-800-778-7007. I haven't used them but you might call. Helpfully,
Lady Constance They have Jeeves and Wooster too.
agentmo...@gmail.com
> Well, after completing "The Inimitable Jeeves", "The Cat-Nappers", and
> some of "Right-ho, Jeeves!", I have noticed what isn't quite right (in
> my muddled brain) about the shows... I think they do a nice job of
> combining/splitting stories, but here's the problem: they make useless
> and stupid changes, for no reason whatsoever. For instance, the ship
> Claude and Eustace were supposed to be on is "Edinburgh Castle", but it
> was changed to "Pride of Natal" in the show. Why?! There isn't any
> possible reason for this! Ah, the stupidity of PBS sometimes... back to
> the old eyes and brain to read ALL the books... thank God for the
> library!
>
> --
> Spamkiller in use. Please add an "n" (minus the quotes) to the end of my
> username (the part before the @) to reply. Sorry it's so rotten, but
> simplicity rules... :-)