LOVING LOVE ON THE SPECTRUM

 

Every once in a while, dear reader, a cynic such as I has to admit to the fact that our cousins across the Atlantic can deliver a televisual shmaltz fest that is neither excruciating nor crass.

This one has it all; the gentle but uplifting pianos, the soft-focus composition, an eye toward a shot that would make a good cover for a self-motivation book and a large dollop of syrupy sub text.

But, and here’s the thing, it’s glorious.

I am talking about Netflix’s Love On The Spectrum, and I am not ashamed to admit that I am hooked. Such is my addiction (if you will) that I have watched all four seasons, completing the latest in three days.

The premise is simple, and we have seen a version before with Channel 4’s The Undateables which veered into some debatable territory given the disabilities of some of the subjects, we are introduced to a set of young American men and women who are on the wide and wonderful Autistic spectrum, searching for love.

Yes, that one thing that unites us all regardless of our circumstances; we all want love.

What is most striking is how supportive their families and friends are. Of course, this sort of programme will have been produced to the nth degree but there are some things you can’t fake. They see the humour and joy in how their children and friends interact with the world and above all show a real sense of encouragement and care.

The main characters of the show have their journeys followed throughout the four seasons, we see the lows and more importantly the highs as they search for “the one”.

It’s easy to forget that by virtue of being on the spectrum the rules and customs of dating, which are hard enough for most people, can be jungle paths to navigate for them. Often, they decide that they have found that special person after 5 minutes, sometimes extended silences take place and we will them to break it with a question or even a smile.

Among the stand out stars of the show are James, the rapid talking font of knowledge with the Hawaiian shirts and mullet, Madison, a charming young woman who has a good grasp of what makes her different, Tanner ever smiling with a heart of gold Abbey, who is full of boundless optimism tempered with reflective moments, the indefatigable Dani who is looking for a man who both loves illustration and is up for some intimacy and Connor who dreams of a bygone England and is supported by his family and in particular his wonderful mother Lise.

The beauty of the show is in the honesty of it's stars their words of wisdom and their capacity for great humour and wonderful soundbites. The off screen film crew, led by show creator Cian O’Clery, that follow their subjects exploits are to be commended as they never patronise or exploit their subjects, rather they are an unseen presence offering comfort and optimism.

What started out as an Australian show soon moved locations to the USA where it has found a loyal audience and thas received seven Emmys. It is supported by Autism organisations and has helped both educate and entertain.

The film makers allow the love seekers to break the fourth wall and this insight is valuable in helping us to understand their trials and tribulations.

Yes the show serves a serious educational point but above all it is very very funny. Funny in a "laugh with' way and because we grow close to the subjects we feel protective towards them.

They stumble and fall in their quest for a life partner but they ultimately believe that cupid’s arrow will find its way to them. I won't spoil it by saying how many arrows land but you find yourself hoping that Cupid has good aim.

If you want an uplift in these dark times then I recommend that you get on the love train and see what life is like on the spectrum.

"LET THEM HATE ME, SO LONG AS THEY FEAR ME"-Caligula

Caligula (Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, 12–41 AD) was the third Roman emperor (37–41 AD), known for his rapid descent from a promising, popular leader into a paranoid, tyrannical, and extravagant despot.

It’s a mad, mad, mad, mad world, particularly where the 47th President of the United States is concerned. Everyone remembers him having a pop at Meryl Streep, who he called average; Streep is unquestionably one of the great actresses of all time. His attack on Bruce Springsteen was another moment of extreme stupidity. Whether or not one likes Springsteen’s music, general consensus points to him as being something of a rock N Roll legend.

Of course, he’s criticised Barrack Obama (has there ever been a greater downgrade in, basically anything than that between the 44th and 45th POTUS?), he’s criticised countries, voting bodies, swathes of journalists, broadcasting companies and many more too numerous to mention.

Now he’s targeted the Pope. Yes, the Pope. You don’t have to be a Catholic to baulk at this, it’s not about religion for me; I’m sure that there are many arguments for organised religions hiding some darker truths.

This is about diplomacy and a basic grasp of the way in which one behaves in public office.

Mind you, when the commander-in chief of the United States Armed Forces says “I’m not a big fan” you know you must be doing something right

This elected (twice) leader is now entering “my horse is now Secretary Of State territory” his ramblings grow more and more bizarre; his dictatorial behaviour is more and more 1984. When a journalist asks an uncomfortable question of him, he merely admonishes them with a “fake news” or “you’re a terrible journalist” shutting down disinters is a tried and tested way for despots to consolidate power.

Then there are the visuals. Where to begin on these photoshopped pieces of outrageous hubris. It’s almost as if he’s created an art form that is equal parts Team America World Police symbolism and that plastic religious tableau’s you see in the pound shop. His sense of architecture and choice of fonts is also the stuff of lunacy. The man has the visual acuity of a Liberace on drugs.

The fact that the American public have yet to tar and feather him and run him out of Washington DC tied backwards on the back of a donkey is amazing. The men in white coats with huge butterfly nets have yet to been seen entering the Whitehouse nor has a Fletcher Christian emerged to cast him at sea in a metaphorical lifeboat with his entourage.

The” leader of the free world’ is now the eccentric bloke who lives down the road that you see wandering around at midday in his pyjamas talking to himself and chasing pigeons. The only difference being that that bloke doesn’t have access to an arsenal of nuclear weapons; the worst thing he could do would be defecating in your front garden, not blowing up the world.

Common sense dictates that he's got to go, and that can’t happen soon enough, but while there are a large number of Americans who actually believe that he is some sort of saviour genius type. 

The wait continues, who will his next target be, David Attenborough?

CHANNEL 4

 

Channel 4’s Purpose and Vision

Our Purpose To create change through entertainment

We aim to create change in the wider world through all of our activities: from TV, to streaming, social media and film – and our day-to-day roles at Channel 4. It’s the impact that Channel 4 has on society, on viewers, on British culture, on the creative industries and on the wider economy. It’s why Channel 4 is – and will continue to be – different. 

Channel 4 was initially a groundbreaking channel. Invested in new comedy with the Comic Strips Presents, in Brookside they had a soap with real integrity, a serialised drama that explored issues that others dared nor to.

Their documentary output was terrific with the likes of Dispatches and cutting edge tackling global and social issues with remarkable clarity. They catered for football with James Richardson’s Gazetta, in which he languidly sipped an espresso on an Italian palazzo whilst bringing us the latest news on Serie A and it's superstars. Nicky Horne bought us the glamour and choreographed violence of the NFL. 

Jonathon Ross did for Channel 4 what Alex Cox did for the BBC with Videodrome and alerted us to the wonderful world of cult cinema. John Waters, Russ Meyer, David Lynch and more were introduced, interviewed and embraced by Ross.

Their Music shows like the Tube were live and exciting. They introduced British audiences to American talent like Bill Hicks.

Youth TV was also on the menu with Network 7, The Word and the Girlie Show which were all irreverent and had a great sense of chaos. There was also some interesting late night content, much of it live and dangerous. 

Channel 4's Comedy output is extraordinary with the long running Peep Show, the genius levels of Brass Eye and Nathan Barley, the bizarre Jam. Sacha Baron Cohen and Ricky Gervais burst forth to global stardom from the 11 O'Clock Show and Phoenix Nights introduced many to Peter Kay. Vic Reeves and Bob Mortimer, Sean Lock and Harry Hill also got exposure from the channel as did Jo Brand and Mark Thomas.

Given that comedy is the most subjective of all the arts I can say that The IT Crowd, Father Ted and the Inbetweeners left me cold, while acknowledging they were huge hits but the channel took chances where comedy was concerned.

They even gave the viewer a voice with Right To Reply, where we saw many a producer taken to task and having to face the music.

Then they discovered that reality TV cost less and gave better opportunities for advertising and went all in on it. There is an overload of reality TV in general on most channels and their 'home' shows are consistent and are good comfort watches but Channel 4 can often dip into ITV2 territory when it comes to relationship TV.

Channel 4 arrived at the right time and challenged the established TV stations. Was it always going to be groundbreaking? no, that's not a realistic expectation, but the best of Channel 4 was some of the best of British Television content.

OF MAN AND MAGAZINE

 

If you sit quietly in a chair for long enough your mind starts to wander and you begin to find your internal dialogue asking questions. Case in point; who buys magazines anymore? when popping into the newsagent to buy a Lottery ticket, a bottle of water or some chewing gum we bear witness to a wall of magazines, magazine's that seem to cover every area of interest. The top shelf is a mainstay, but don't most people access their naked people via the internet? The TV guides are many and varied but does the ritual of biro and reading glasses circling the upcoming programmes still exist?

Lifestyle magazines, those tomes dedicated to narcissism shine brightly on the shelves enticing with a hollow promise of a glimpse into the lives of the rich, the famous and the ubiquitous. Fashion flashes it's flashy facade from the covers of the high profile titles that speak of glamour and envy, a chance to look at what £2000 buys you at the Gucci flag store.

The kids, what about the kids? Here you go, magazine's a-plenty with cheap gifts stuck on the covers and trading cards to entice.  The eye level placement reaches out to young fingers and many a parent has bought one of this light pamphlets fior the sake of keeping the peace.

Gender specific magazines, Cars and Motorbikes, Fishing, Golf, Cinema, Puzzles all are catered for all are welcome.

There is still, thankfully a place for Private Eye, Time and Newsweek along with other mags that require a degree of concentration

I long ago gave up buying the likes of Empire, Arena, The Face , GQ and the like, religiously. It felt like some sort of style  statement to have a pile of magazines on display, but in reality they were just gathering dust. I would sit and read these magazines in my quiet chair and find articles of interest and items to dream about owning, but the reality was that the publishers knew exactly what they were doing, I was the audience for these particular magazines that catered to my interests and fed my aspiration. 

Now that everything is available on the internet I wonder if there is a future fr magazines but maybe like other things, physical media will make a omeback and those shelves will be empty, not because of lack of interest but because of demand.