Wednesday, June 01, 2005
The Real Good Life
Last night, ITV began a new series, The Real Good Life, watching three families as they attempt to become self-sufficient, with a heafty nod to the old BBC Sitcom The Good Life. I read a preview of this series in a newspaper last week and it appeals to me because, perhaps like alot of people, it is something I would like to strive towards, hence our vegetable planting. Excuse me if this ends up a rant.
First, though, I must make some observations about the format of the show. Mainly, "it's a bit cack". I honestly believe this show could be a good way to teach people why it's sensible to grow your own veggies, and how to do it while still keeping the "human" element in there. But, not unexpectedly, they have almost removed all references to the garden itself and are concentrating on editing the programme so that its entirely a docu-soap about people arguing. They seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time showing the quite hideous behaviour of Neil Aldridge and the unhelpful, miserable kids of all the families (with the exception of Oliver Smith). The Smiths and the Attfields (and to be fair, Veronica Aldridge too) all look like they're at least putting a bit of effort in. Poor Paul Smith didn't seem to be getting much help with the heavy work though, other than from Oliver.
The things I don't understand are as follows. Firstly, the narrator of the show brushed over the fact that the TV company has paid the families' mortgages off (now we know why Neil applied) with the fact that "to be self-sufficient you can't be in debt". Uh, hello? Why not? The show also implies that self-sufficiency means not using money (e.g. they must barter this and that). I see no problem being self-sufficient and having debts. You must just make enough to sell to pay off those debts. Sure it's harder, but that's how it would be in real self-sufficiency. The poor families don't seem to have had any help, or training in being self-sufficient other than a trip to a community in Wales who are self-sufficient. More importantly, they're self-dependant, not just self-sufficient. This means they don't use electric, gas, or sewage facilities. This wasn't made at all clear in the programme and made the implication that if you're self-sufficient you must poo into a hole in the ground.
Anyway, despite all these reservations, I think I'll enjoy the show. I've read what happened in the newspaper and it's clear that the Attfields, who are making light of the situation, trying the best, and trying to enjoy it will be the most successful. I just hope I'm going to be able to stomach any more of Neil. I can't believe Veronica puts up with him, and although the paper made it sound like she was in the wrong for bogging off to Dubai for a week, I can so sympathise with her. I'm surprised she hasn't bogged off for good, to be honest.
First, though, I must make some observations about the format of the show. Mainly, "it's a bit cack". I honestly believe this show could be a good way to teach people why it's sensible to grow your own veggies, and how to do it while still keeping the "human" element in there. But, not unexpectedly, they have almost removed all references to the garden itself and are concentrating on editing the programme so that its entirely a docu-soap about people arguing. They seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time showing the quite hideous behaviour of Neil Aldridge and the unhelpful, miserable kids of all the families (with the exception of Oliver Smith). The Smiths and the Attfields (and to be fair, Veronica Aldridge too) all look like they're at least putting a bit of effort in. Poor Paul Smith didn't seem to be getting much help with the heavy work though, other than from Oliver.
The things I don't understand are as follows. Firstly, the narrator of the show brushed over the fact that the TV company has paid the families' mortgages off (now we know why Neil applied) with the fact that "to be self-sufficient you can't be in debt". Uh, hello? Why not? The show also implies that self-sufficiency means not using money (e.g. they must barter this and that). I see no problem being self-sufficient and having debts. You must just make enough to sell to pay off those debts. Sure it's harder, but that's how it would be in real self-sufficiency. The poor families don't seem to have had any help, or training in being self-sufficient other than a trip to a community in Wales who are self-sufficient. More importantly, they're self-dependant, not just self-sufficient. This means they don't use electric, gas, or sewage facilities. This wasn't made at all clear in the programme and made the implication that if you're self-sufficient you must poo into a hole in the ground.
Anyway, despite all these reservations, I think I'll enjoy the show. I've read what happened in the newspaper and it's clear that the Attfields, who are making light of the situation, trying the best, and trying to enjoy it will be the most successful. I just hope I'm going to be able to stomach any more of Neil. I can't believe Veronica puts up with him, and although the paper made it sound like she was in the wrong for bogging off to Dubai for a week, I can so sympathise with her. I'm surprised she hasn't bogged off for good, to be honest.
Comments:
<< Home
I haven't seen it but it does sound annoying that they've put docu-soap type stuff in! Oh well. Do you think a person could survive only on pumpkins?
Post a Comment
<< Home