Television programmes [2]

Well I'm officially not the intended audience for Outlander because oh my gosh NOTHING IS HAPPENING!!!

Also it sucks. I mean really, wake me up when something happens other than everyone being impressed and falling in love with the main character. Talk about feeding into fantasies of... I don't know, irresistible attractiveness.

Forest Shepherd wrote:Well I'm officially not the intended audience for Outlander because oh my gosh NOTHING IS HAPPENING!!!

Also it sucks. I mean really, wake me up when something happens other than everyone being impressed and falling in love with the main character. Talk about feeding into fantasies of... I don't know, irresistible attractiveness.

That's why I stopped watching it, it seems like 99% filler. The idea is interesting but as you said, nothing happens.

I was all set for an interesting portrayal of Scottish-English relations and the historical realities of the time, but the show seems more interested in showing off the main character's chumminess with the local "witch", her skills at massaging the laird's buttocks, and frickin' love-triangles.

Alright, so perhaps some of those may have been the historical realities of the time, but I'm not convinced that the show isn't cherry-picking for the sake of illuminating the main character's enlightened state amongst the simpletons. Especially when very conveniently the first religious figure we see is a raving Latin-spouting shmuck who preys on people's fears and inability to recognize poisoning.

Sir Walter Scott, Diana Gabaldon is not. I think I'll stick to Rob Roy.

(What's Petty's opinion on all this? It's like if Sergeant Howie was from England!)

{{I only saw the first two episodes- was enough for me- what you describe Forest is how I thought it was going so didnt bother any further.
The history is sort of accurate in bits and all over the place in others- stuff is moved about, shuffled, players change, motives change from what I can tell- seems about as likely to be historically accurate to me as  Who historical is.

If you want to watch some good Scottish films I'd recommend the following actual made in Scotland or Scottish made films- though none are historical- oddly enough we dont really make tv based on our own history- they are mainly English history on TV (one of the reasons Braveheart was so huge here beyond the jingoism and inspite of all the glaring inaccuracies and misrepresentations is that most Scots had never seen the story dramatised before. Thats the 'soft' power of English colonialism.)

The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie
Macbeth (polanski)
My Childhood (1968), My Ain Folk (1973) and My Way Home (1978) trilogy
The Wickerman
Gregory's Girl
Local Hero
Shallow Grave
Trainspotting
Ratcatcher
Dog Soldiers
Bonnie Scotland (Laurel and Hardy)
Small Faces
Whisky Galore

and if you have to go historical the best of the bunch is probably Liam Neilsons Rob Roy.

Should be something for everyone there I think.

For Tv not a huge selection in terms of drama at least, we tend to do more comedy or comedy drama-}}

Hamish Macbeth
The Shetlands
Tutti Frutti
The Crow Road
Rebus

Scots had never seen the story. I thought you had the best education in the world? What was to stop Scottish people making a tv programme? come on Petty its the 21st century, the English colonial schtick won't wash any more. You are not poor wee slaves, if you had wanted to make a film you would have.

Och the naiooo, for them sassenach's have got the film rights!

I thought you had the best education in the world? What was to stop Scottish people making a tv programme?- Figg


{{{Our education is only semi-independent of England- more so now than previously- but whilst there was always differences in administration and in exams the national curriculum was still national UK wide- that meant when I was growing up history was 1066 and then the Roman invasion of Britain- all English centric- we did not get taught our own history.
That all changed drastically after the Scottish Parliament came into being and especially after the SNP got power.

As to ,making our own TV- when you have generations growing up who dont know their own histroy you are less likely to get historical dramas about them- also BBC Scotland are just a branch office- we dont even get our own news bulletin let alone making expensive historical dramas.}}}

I don't believe for one second that you were not taught Scottish history.

{{Ah well Figg you believing it or not does not change the fact I was not taught Scottish history, any of it, not even how the Treaty of Union came about in the first place- primary school we did Romans (and then again in more depth in 1st year secondary school, technically there is some scottish history there- but its very limited, 90% of it was about England and the Romans- Boudica ect) I did O grade History (Norman Invasion of 1066 and the build up to WW1) and I did Higher History (WW2 and a whole load of rather dull stuff about treaties and the League of Nations) not a jot of Scottish history- when Braveheart came out bar some diehard nationalists and people who lived in Wallace country where he has some monuments and shit- the rest of us had barely ever heard of him beyond some sort of freedom fighter against the english who became a bit of a pain in the arse and got killed for it.

Oddly where I did get more scottish history was geography- as it covers the ice ages and their effect and shaping the land through ice and vulcanism and earthquake- but it was not interested in what people did just what the land did- was a still at least a general historical overview of Scotland from ice age to present, just not people history as such}}}

Ahhh... That  explains why everything Over There is meassured in th the size of Texas or football fields.

{{Here even just trying to introduce Scottish history into our own schools has been difficult and come under political attack.

'The SNP schools minister has dismissed claims the government is trying to brainwash children with a new Scottish studies course.
Alasdair Allan, who has raised concern Scots history is being neglected in schools, said the plans were supported by parents and teachers.
Labour, which previously expressed strong concern over the move, has given it a cautious welcome.
But the Tories questioned whether such a course was needed.
Ministers have been taking views from a range of experts on Scottish studies, an SNP election manifesto pledge, which would focus on Scotland's historical, literary, linguistic and cultural heritage.
The government is keen to look at Scots history in particular, but would also like to see more Scottish literature taught in schools, as well as Scots and Gaelic languages.
Ministers have insisted pupils would not be required to take up a course like Scottish studies.
Labour education spokesman Ken Macintosh, who told the BBC: "My suspicion is that this is just the SNP trying to brainwash children into their political view."
The schools minister said: "All young people deserve the opportunity to learn about their own country - and nowhere else but here would this be questioned. Those who still do may perhaps wish to consider taking a deep breath, turning away from their own constitutional obsessions for one moment and seeing that Scottish studies is healthy, normal, supported by people across the political spectrum and across the world of education. And it is also supported by parents."- BBC

And that's now! Back when I was at school there was nothing. We got English history, not our own. }}}

if kids wanted badly enough to know their own Scottish history they could read a book, or their parents could force them if they couldn't give a monkeys, either way if its important enough, you find a way.

{{{Thats how I learned Figg- from about the age of 15 I went out and found out- got books and stuff, later when it got invented, the internet too and added to what I had read. But point is I had to want to go out and find it.
And for young kids- when they learn fastest and best and is the best age for education- they first have to know a thing exists before they can know they want to find out more about it. And they are not told about it in our education system. So many like me don't tend to go looking till they are much older, and the majority never look at all.

And as you can see from the above post I made, even now it is still an ongoing struggle just to be allowed to teach our own children our own countries history in our own schools- thats what I mean by the effect of soft english power- its not troops on the border, its not banning tartan and bagpipes and our language as it was in the past- its stuff like this- denying us knowledge of ourselves and replacing it with knowledge of England instead. }}}

halfwise wrote:

Amarië wrote:Ahhh... That  explains why everything Over There is meassured in th the size of Texas or football fields.

We use football fields due to our obstinate inability to wrap our minds around the metric system.v

Just to clarify, there's an important distinction between American football fields and FIFA football fields.  
The area of an American football field is 5,350 m2
while the area of a FIFA football field is  7,140 m2
and the area of Texas is a whopping 696,241 km²

So that's 130,140,000 American football fields in a "State of Texas"
but only    97,510,000 FIFA football fields in a "State of Texas"

I suspect this is why so many Europeans are confused by Texas.

halfwise wrote: Jumps straight from yards to miles.

The furlong is still a pretty useful unit. Surveyors and farmers still use them.
1F = 660ft = 220yd = 1/8mi

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{{Thats how I learned Figg- from about the age of 15 I went out and found out- got books and stuff, later when it got invented, the internet too and added to what I had read. But point is I had to want to go out and find it.
And for young kids- when they learn fastest and best and is the best age for education- they first have to know a thing exists before they can know they want to find out more about it. And they are not told about it in our education system. So many like me don't tend to go looking till they are much older, and the majority never look at all.

And as you can see from the above post I made, even now it is still an ongoing struggle just to be allowed to teach our own children our own countries history in our own schools- thats what I mean by the effect of soft english power- its not troops on the border, its not banning tartan and bagpipes and our language as it was in the past- its stuff like this- denying us knowledge of ourselves and replacing it with knowledge of England instead. }}}

there is a set curriculum which everyone has to follow in Britain no matter which area you live in. Its not some sinister plot, its standardisation. We all get to learn Shakespeare and certain types of maths and biology, its just the curriculum. It irons out regional differences and sets a level playing field.

I know the standardized curriculum I grew up with had a strong political agenda about American manifest destiny and American exceptionalism. I was just looking through one of those old text books a couple years ago, and it was really pretty awful!

Among other things Native Americans only get the briefest of mentions, and then only when in wars such as Battle of Little Big Horn where Gen. Custer is implicitly presented as the tragic hero and Indians presented as bloodthirsty savages.

Japan didn't fair much better. Or Spain for that matter. Or the American South. Or Great Britain. It was basically an indoctrination document on why America is always in the right by definition whenever we go to war. (and how could THAT possibly go wrong? )

Mrs Figg wrote:

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{{Thats how I learned Figg- from about the age of 15 I went out and found out- got books and stuff, later when it got invented, the internet too and added to what I had read. But point is I had to want to go out and find it.
And for young kids- when they learn fastest and best and is the best age for education- they first have to know a thing exists before they can know they want to find out more about it. And they are not told about it in our education system. So many like me don't tend to go looking till they are much older, and the majority never look at all.

And as you can see from the above post I made, even now it is still an ongoing struggle just to be allowed to teach our own children our own countries history in our own schools- thats what I mean by the effect of soft english power- its not troops on the border, its not banning tartan and bagpipes and our language as it was in the past- its stuff like this- denying us knowledge of ourselves and replacing it with knowledge of England instead. }}}

there is a set curriculum which everyone has to follow in Britain no matter which area you live in. Its not some sinister plot, its standardisation. We all get to learn Shakespeare and certain types of maths and biology, its just the curriculum. It irons out regional differences and sets a level playing field.

And subdues local culture and tradition! Homeschooling for everyone! Down with the system!

there is a set curriculum which everyone has to follow in Britain no matter which area you live in. Its not some sinister plot, its standardisation.- Figg


{{You started off not even believing we didn't get taught Scots history- now your saying that its all fine we dont get any of our own history. English instant self justification- I dont even think you lot knowing your doing it you've been so institutionally ingrained with bias.

And its not standardisation- its English history- or are you telling me that its purely coincidental there is no mention of events like say The Highland Clearances, or the Jacobite uprising of 1745, or Wallace, or the Bruce, or hell the Scottish enlightenment which not only effected all of the Uk but all of Europe and arguably the world as the train of thought which leads to the creation of the American doctrine has many roots right there.
Are you honestly trying to tell me that knowing Boudica led a tiny futile rebellion against the Romans and got her arse kicked for it is more important in UK history than the above?

No Figg, you'd have to be naive to think its all purely coincidence that the history curriculum in the UK is all but purged of the history of all other UK nations but England. }}}

Of course the way history is thought it highly biased, which is genuinely dangerous, as it imbues people with the most ludicrous thing of all, patriotism.

“Patriotism is a word; and one that generally comes to mean either my country, right or wrong, which is infamous, or my country is always right, which is imbecile.”

― Patrick O'Brian

I quite liked Outlander, it didn't stress out about getting where it was going. It's nice now and then to get a show not burdened with destination fever, with a female protagonists, and let's be honest, focused on some different aspects of culture than your everyday, run of the mill, Game of Thrones pastiche would do. It does have it's weaknesses, which I'm not sure if the books posess to the same degree or not. I did not get through the whole second season, partly because the inevitability of the ending let me down, and partly because the story in parts failed to keep me interested. But I might at some point.