the Nathan Barley effect - Analysis 2

More intriguing thoughts:

“At the other end of the spectrum is Dan Ashcroft (Julian Barratt), a journalist who writes about the “idiots” and their fallacies. Much to his chagrin, he is a big hit with said idiots, Barley among them, who can’t seem to grasp the fact that he is writing about them. It’s not hard to see Dan as a stand-in for Morris: a world-weary writer who can’t quite believe that his work has been embraced by the very people that he set out to criticise. In fact, and argument can be made for Nathan Barley being the Charlie Brooker to Chris Morris’ Dan Ashcroft.”

To me it seems a little unfair and a bit of a weird stream of logic. What I get from that piece of writing is that the author doesn’t find Brooker’s work as worthy (if at all) as Morris’ with also the question what Brooker has done outside online stuff. I realize this was written pre-Screenwipe, but even then Brooker had done work in the media (comics and reviews in magazines and a radio show). Another problem I have with this piece is that it makes me wonder very hard, if Morris’ criticizes his followers of which Brooker is one and he finds Brooker an idiot, why does Morris choose to work with him on a series? I genuinely believe Morris liked Brooker and his work enough to try and make that series together with him.

I have to admit I’m a little surprised about Morris’ involvement and specifically about him willing to work with Brooker. I also think Brooker’s work is nothing compared to Morris’ work. But to say Brooker is Nathan Barley to Morris’ Dan Ashscroft goes too far.

On the other hand, like many others have noted, Ashcroft realizes he might be another idiot. If Morris’ is Ashcroft and realizes he’s another idiot, he might also find fewer objections in working with Brooker. However, looking back on the line of people Morris used to work with (the brilliant Armando Iannucci, Peter Baynhem, etc) I think it’s more to the point Morris’ saw potential in Brooker and the character Nathan Barley. I ask you, why would an idiot opt for another bigger idiot when he once knew brilliance? Even Dan Ashcroft doesn’t do that wilfully.

“With all the scene-setting out of the way, let’s move on to the merits of the show itself as a piece of entertainment. How much you get out of it will depend on how familiar you are with the sub-culture being satirised, because, when it comes down to it, there isn’t much else in the show.”

Besides dodgy punctuation, that piece is not true either; there’s more to it then the eye meets…apparently. At first sight it’s about the young trending media crowd. Look again and realize the weird hairdo’s and obnoxious gadgetry is not the aim. Like the author said before the aim are the unoriginal followers who quote while missing the point. Earlier on he wrote:

"If all this sounds familiar, then it should. In a sense, this would appear to be precisely the cult that have latched itself on to Morris’ work, proclaiming him to be a genius and the saviour of television. For many people, his work on The Day Today and Brass Eye was appealing simply because it was filled with off-beat, non-sequitur humour and controversial subject matter. In turn, these people tend to believe that, by parroting the same material, they too are being original and thought-provoking, completely missing the subtler political and social comments that Morris was making."

And now he says if only you know these types you’ll enjoy it, because the aim is so narrow. If you are willing to look beyond the superficial decorations you will find a richer base on which ridicule is made. If you find it funny is a different question.

Source: Home Cinema: DVD review

the Nathan Barley effect - Progress

Last Friday I spent a great deal of time reading reviews, articles and comments about "Nathan Barley". The general consensus is so confusing and ripped up in groups, it's almost incomprensible and therefore hard to keep up; I forgot most of what I've read. I do remember finding a lot of interesting views and analysis; we might be on to something.

I still don't think "Nathan Barley" is as good as Morris' and Brooker's other works and I still don't think it's a brilliant series, cause it simply isn't. I do think however, that the idea and the way they tried to do it was admirable and adds value. I believe this project holds value, but I can't quite pinpoint what it is. I can't help but see it as a bit of a failure and yet as an important piece of work.

I probably research on for a bit more.

the Nathan Barley effect - Analysis

Nathan Barley makes me laugh. Not the series or the character, but rather the aftermath to which I was late.

To me it seems the series is like the article written by the character Dan Ashcroft in the series. In a viewer’s comment I read an interesting observation:

“Before I watched this series on DVD, I was wondering why there were so many bad reviews by fans of Chris Morris. But now I kind of understood the reason why. Because the story is pretty much about Chris Morris himself; a caricature of what he has achieved and people who appreciate his comedy. Chris Morris's followers are all despised in there.”

Source: IMDB User reviews

I don’t completely agree with the conclusion, but I can see how Chris Morris could be regarded as the Dan Ashcroft figure. I don’t think however, that it’s specifically his followers who are despised in the series. I think it’s rather about those trend following media types, and I base my opinion on what I remember Charlie Brooker (the father of the creation Nathan Barley) saying in an interview. He said there was this kind of media type who followed the latest trends, which included wearing stupid clothes and gadgets, that he despised. Nathan Barley was created as the character despised by a narrator in the fictional not existing program Cunt which was thought up for the fake TV-listings on Brooker’s site TVGoHome. Basically, Cunt was Brooker’s outlet of frustration and irritation with those idiots.

It doesn’t say anything about Chris Morris’ intentions with the character though, but since the TV-series didn’t steer away from the trend following media types; those are still the people being portrayed. I still don’t think the series was aimed at specifically the Morris/Brooker following, but more generally at the quote-spouting spoon-fed pseudo intellectuals missing the point.

The brilliance in Nathan Barley lies in the parallels between fiction and reality. Without realizing it everybody, that includes me, contributed to the comedy of Nathan Barley, because the series is the article ‘the Rise of the Idiots’ complete with publication and reaction.

The yay-sayers, who most likely will quote lines like “That’s well Mexico” or “Keep it foolish” are very like the character Nathan Barley; oblivious to the fact they’re ridiculed while jumping on the trendy Nathan Barley wagon.
The nay-sayers are not quite like Dan Ashcroft; they’re rather the one character supporting Ashcroft while shaking the head; namely Sasha the receptionist.
That leaves the writers Morris and Brooker to fulfil the Ashcroft part; opposing the idiots while incidentally enjoying the occasional game of cock-muff-bumhole.

Nathan Barley sneers at a broad scale of potential idiots, it might even sneer at itself.

The series is skilfully written as in that we all fell in the trap including the writers/creators. The series however is more an accurate observation than a laugh-out-loud comedy. It might have failed in making most people laugh, but in the aftermath it turns out to be a cleverly set-up affair hence all the reactions and discussions between yay- and nay-sayers.

the Nathan Barley effect

This is effectively throwing someone’s words back into his face and I like it

The truth of this took a sadder turn recently with Brooker’s wrongcast, Nathan Barley, a sitcom he co-wrote with Chris Morris. Charlie Brooker and Chris Morris write a sitcom! How could it possibly go wrong? I don’t know, but it did. It had its moments, but after some of the poorer episodes, to nick yet more of Brooker’s images, I felt like sewing my eyelids shit with fishing wire, slicing the top of my skull off, and scooping the memories out with a spoon. A couple of good gags were stretched out into a complete Bo Selecta of a series. Not completely terrible, and better than most, but when Brooker and Morris get together, anything less than genius is a crushing disappointment.

Source: readysteadybook

Te stolen Brookerism is really funny, especially since it’s this time about him.

the Nathan Barley effect

The effect of the series, not the effect of the blithering idiots portrayed in the series.

The whole Nathan Barley thing and all the movement around it completely confuses me.

First of all is there the collaboration between Chris Morris and Charlie Brooker. How did they meet? How did that collaboration came about? Unfunny fact is that I already found out by reading the “Chris Morris biography” (I’m not sure I’m allowed to call it that, that’s why I put it in quotations, which seems a weird way to put it). Weirdly, even after reading about how they met and started working together, the fact that Charlie Brooker worked with Chris Morris still boggles my mind. I don’t know why.

Then there are the many negative reactions to the series opposed to the very few but passionate positive reactions. That I understand; it’s just regular online bickering and bitching. Though on the other hand, especially the negative reactions tend to bewilder me beyond comprehension. Here’s one (semi-negative reactions on a possible 2nd series):

Nathan Barley trundles on

According to Media Guardian’s Media Monkey, Chris Morris wants to do a second series of Nathan Barley, which surprises me. What’s not surprising is that Kevin Lygo doesn’t want a second series of Nathan Barley. Who said ratings weren’t important to Channel 4?

Personally, I’d rather have a speedy DVD release of Nathan Barley than a second series.

But Media Monkey continues:

“Just who, exactly did Morris base “self-facilitating media node” Nathan Barley on? Step forward Andrew Newman, a regular collaborator with Morris on the likes of Brass Eye and now head of entertainment at Channel 4.”

I think I saw Andrew Newman on Channel 4’s 50 Greatest Comedy Sketches last night, and he does seem a bit odd. Not necessarily Barley-esque though. That’s all by the by though. You see, Chris Morris didn’t create Nathan Barley. Charlie Brooker created Barley years before Morris got his hands on the character.

Source: doctorvee.co.uk

It’s funny how both authors get things a little wrong. The doctorvee author is correct in noting that Chris Morris didn’t create the Nathan Barley character as such, though he had a big hand in making TV-Nathan Barley the way he turned out in the series. And to say Morris got his hands on the character sounds like he took it off Charlie Brooker’s hands, which he didn’t; they created the TV-series together.

Yes, I know; I’m a pedant.

Just keep reading; as much as it is confusing it’s also funny. Well, I laughed.

More later; Nathan Barley keeps creeping back into my life (like a real cunt/prick/idiot does).

Giant Charlie Brooker Terrifies London

April 13th, 2011

Breaking News: Minutes ago, Minister of Defence Liam Fox gave a stuttering, panicked statement to the press attempting to allay fears for the safety of Londoners after popular TV commentator and writer Charlie Brooker was reported bursting out of his home, glowing and screaming in pain, before growing to over 450 feet in a matter of seconds and cutting a savage path of destruction across central London.



Nuclear scientist Professor Royston Biggs-Hoson explained that the broadcaster’s long-term viewing history of banal television shows had exposed him to the unprecedented and highly volatile level of gamma radiation, causing a dramatic change to his cell structure. Brooker is currently sleeping in Hyde Park, giving experts a brief respite to assess their options.


“Make no mistake, an irascible pundit of this size could endanger us all,” Mr Fox continued, “but we are doing everything we can to take control of the situation.”


“RAF fighters have been scrambled to keep a presence in the air. We are advising anyone who has appeared on or auditioned for a reality show in the last 10 years to remain in their homes. A cordon of military vehicles is being mobilised around Shoreditch, and the offices of Sky News and Channels 4 and 5 have been evacuated.”


The minister was then barraged with questions about what the government intends to do to resolve the crisis.


“We’re looking into various options and asking for help from our allies in the US and Europe,” he said. “We considered a tranquilizer dart, but there is simply not enough available to subdue him.”


“We’ve been advised that a distracting book might prove an antidote to such damaging levels of gamma exposure – though unfortunately they’re now all too small for him to read. Right now we are assembling a large PA system on a helicopter so that someone can fly by and read him The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.”


As the situation continues to change, the minister had to admit that other TV pundits are also showing alarming levels of radioactivity.


“Currently our worst-case scenario is the same fate befalling Harry Hill, who then storms into Brooker territory to claim supremacy. Who would pose the greater threat? Unfortunately there is only one way we are going to find out.”

Source: the Poke