TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson, soon to tour Australia after a “controversial” delay, is really not much chop. This is not to say that the mediocre man whose broadcast persona was lifted from an imaginary chip shop in the last days of empire is powerfully evil. It’s more to suggest that his appeal is almost solely down to his act as a defender of a particular class of men. If Clarkson is at all interesting — and, intellectually, he really isn’t — it is as how a social species can monetise its own endangerment.
As far as automotive entertainment goes, Top Gear was, at one point, not too bad; not as good as Pimp My Ride but certainly better than Monster Truck Garage. But, of course, as everybody said at the peak of the program’s success, “it’s not about the cars!”. Clarkson’s charm was not so much fuelled by his knowledge of high-performance vehicles as it was by his irreverence. Just as his best mate A.A. Gill never really wrote centrally about food, Clarkson never really spoke centrally about cars. Both men were talking about themselves. And, of course, their dwindling cultural relevance as derisive grammar school twats, a decline that first served to amuse them, and us, and then became a source of anxiety and brought forth a salvo of unfunny racial slurs.
To be fair, there was a time that Gill, from whom Clarkson has received exacting tips on media performance, was very, very funny. “There’s only so much you can do for lasagne in the looks department. The only garnish that would improve it would be a power cut”, Gill wrote in the Times before copying the career of Christopher Hitchens, as Clarkson has tried to, and leaving behind the difficult work of making British newspaper readers laugh at the weakness of the bourgeoisie for the better-paid pastime of taking the piss out of the underclass for American glossies. With few exceptions, Englishmen of letters tend to lose their wit, and their socialist wisdom, in the Atlantic.
Clarkson never made the continental move entirely, but he certainly became, as Hitchens did, a prize fuckwit. As success encroached, so did his need to hang onto it. He built his persona on a self-awareness of life as a useless middle-class duffer. He has tried to sustain it by defending himself and his “rights” as a middle-class duffer. He’s now achieved the opposite of the thing that made him famous. Once, he asked us to laugh at the white, middle-class Englishman in all his endangered primacy. Now he demands that we respect him.
There’s more than a whiff of the white male victim about Clarkson, who has said vile things, which I elect not to amplify here. Whether these things are said to make a point, presumably about “censorship” and “political correctness”, or because he genuinely believes them is of no matter. The only thing that does matter is that Clarkson, for a brief period a refreshing presence, now offers us no more surprises than that other, nicer middling middle-class entertainer, Michael Palin. What he offers is a fear that power is disappearing from his grip, and that of his kind.
In his travel programs, Palin offers disgust masked as fascination. He holds these “other” countries up to the camera with a pair of friendly tongs, never any mention that these delightful and curious places are drowning in malnutrition and debt. Britain gave the world ironic detachment as surely as it did bad food and partitioning — a process that led, in large part, to the poverty Palin ignores. But, Palin, just a little older than Clarkson, can afford to continue the relaxed fantasy that he is an important man. Clarkson feels his importance slipping and abandons his ironic detachment in favour of just being an out-and-out prick.
When the powerful feel themselves failing, they do tend toward brutal, stupid acts. In recent years, Clarkson has revealed himself to be not only as frightened as a minor official of the British Raj in 1947 but also as a wit of only limited erudition. Like a Kyle Sandilands who has half-read the collected works of Auberon Waugh — and Richard Hammond in this scenario is the obsequious Jackie O — he shows us that the Empire has no clothes. Naked and empty of any inspiration save for his need to be loved, Clarkson is now doing less for the England of the historic imagination than the Beckhams.
Clarkson has nothing left to say beyond “Believe me, I’m very important”. His appearance and demeanour led us to believe for some years that there was something more than self-regard propping up the act. But there is even less left in him than there is in England and the 20th-century middle-class Englishman who falsely became a global symbol of erudition and restraint. He has become an angry, underdone bully wailing for his lost privilege. If he’s not careful, he’ll be crushed by a hybrid car.


41 thoughts on “Jeremy Clarkson and the obsolescence of middle-class white men”
Lee Tinson
April 3, 2015 at 2:00 pmWell, Helen, he seems to be of very great interest to you. More so than to me, I must say. And I’m an old white male. Jeremy, as Hammond said, is really just a knob who does his job pretty well.
Write about something worthwhile! You know you can!
db
April 3, 2015 at 2:59 pmWith the Palin comparison he never seems to come across in interviews or performances as seeing himself as important – however he is an actor so it could be a facade.
His “light” travel programs are the sort of genre where he’d be filmed walking outside the Sydney Opera House instead of past junkies in a back street in Kings Cross, hence a lack of showing malnutrition and debt in other places. Who would get a comedian to present a serious documentary?
Helen Razer
April 3, 2015 at 8:12 pm@db my point in employing Palin is to show him as the popular Englishman of a slightly earlier age who didn’t need to say racist things because his superiority was assured. I find his travel programs gross in their detachment and just how one can travel to the part of the world he has and see nothing but Jolly Hockey Sticks and Happy People is testimony not to his overt self-importance but to his self-importance that is absolutely assured.
I thought it was obvious that I was depicting Palin as the cool predecessor to the hot rage of Clarkson. I apologise if I did not make this clear.
Helen Razer
April 3, 2015 at 8:13 pmThanks, @Jussarian!
AR
April 4, 2015 at 6:34 amAn example of Razer’s logorrhoea – the article contained 825 words, well chosen & effective.
One (just ONE!) of her responses on this thread had 976. I began to lose the will to live after the first half dozen lines.
More is not better. Quantity is no substitute for quality.
You clearly can write succinctly and yet… and yet .. you choose not to, too often.
Itsarort
April 4, 2015 at 8:27 amYes, god knows what happened to Hitchens in his later years. If Vidal couldn’t understand it, then know one really can.
But Clarkson is probably nothing more(as most people here seem to agree), than an oafish twat that fires broadsides at soft Leftie targets from within-side his pseudo-Tory fortress. Most of the time he’s funny, sometimes he’s an arsehole, and all the time, it’s just make-believe.
And to deconstruct Clarkson, the man, as anything other than the fool playing jester to the clown (albeit a very affluent one), is just an,
“Excrement! That’s what I think of Mr.J.Evans Pritchard.”
moment, from Dead Poets Society.
Helen Razer
April 4, 2015 at 11:42 pm@AR Leaving aside your peculiar and potentially unhealthy habit of cutting, pasting and assessing the exact length in words not only of my pieces for Crikey but of my responses to them, what in heaven’s name can you be on about? I was responding in an informal context to @old greybeard in a comprehensive way not out of bloated self-regard and windy writing but because he asked me some questions that appeared to trouble him. That you elected not only to count but to read and then critique what was intended as a polite and well-considered reply to someone else (and clearly labelled as such by use of the “@” preceding username) perhaps says more about your own peccadilloes than it does of mine.
Maxine Stewart
April 5, 2015 at 3:01 pmWhat a hateful article.
TwoEyeHead
April 5, 2015 at 6:28 pmHelen Razer’s considered responses to lowly Comment dwellers is impressive. Taking criticism and fighting her corner has me as a new Helen Razer convert.
She’s the best ever – though a little less of the celebrity stuff would be good.
The Old Bill
April 5, 2015 at 10:52 pmTo quote James May on Jeremy Clarkson, The man is a knob, but I quite like him. He must have had something, even my most left wing green friends enjoyed watching the show just to despise him. Even the Scots watch the program in droves, regardless of his refusal to interview their countrymen because of his small minded racist views on anyone living too far north.
Micheal Palin does travel documentaries. He believes the world is an absurd and silly place. He writes Ripping Yarns about boring little gits with shovel collections. Apparently because they arn’t filmed as a diatribe against famine and child soldiers, he treats his subject / subjects with disgust?
Think you need a quick visit back to the UK to realign yourself with their peculiar sense of humour Helen. I myself can hardly wait until later on this year when I will land at Heathrow and face the onslaught of self depreciating humour and sarcasm of the customs and rental car staff.