The Reckoning

[buzby]

In the dramatization, the interview took place in a police station.

It didn't, it took place in his office at Stoke Mandeville. The main difference between the account in the police report and the drama was that Savile had asked another man to be there as a witness, whereas in the drama he was alone.

[Mobbd]

It didn't, it took place in his office at Stoke Mandeville. The main difference between the account in the police report and the drama was that Savile had asked another man to be there as a witness, whereas in the drama he was alone.

Aye, someone up thread corrected me. I read it as a police station but I got that wrong.

[Senior Baiano]

Why didn't someone just write to Jim'll Fix It asking him to fix it so that he didn't do any more sex crimes

[jazzy_sabotage]

That brief reference in the last episode to Savile's wrestling days (?) just did just make me kind of wish this touched on how he tried and failed to use that space as another means to further his career.

Would've been quite something to see a dramatisation of the late Adrian Street decidedly beating the everloving shit out of him. The only thing close to justice that Jinglenonce got in his life.

It even happened in Nottingham and all. Will be amazed if it doesn't come up when Chart Music covers him tbh

[chip]

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v34/n21/andrew-o-hagan/light-entertainment

The LRB review of the book linked to in that Guardian article is a must read in terms of understanding the level of tolerance for paedophilia and pederasty at the BBC long predating Savile's employment. It explains how the old patrician system of good old boys effectively erased not only crimes but the concept of victimhood itself.

It doesn't touch upon this but it is worth pondering whether the extent of the evil and suffering endured (and/or meted out) during wartime suppressed any idea that complaints by children regarding sexual abuse were to be maintained.

That carried over into the early 60s.

The LRB article also acknowledges what The Reckoning doesn't, that Savile most likely had hundreds of consensual (or at least initially consensual) sexual encounters as well as the unsolicited gropes and attacks he did.

Fascinatingly grim article that, thanks for sharing.

[shoulders]

Yes, it's a great example of LRB's propensity for long, indulgent commentary rather than literary criticism, but also in this case massively useful and worthwhile.

Whether it's central argument, that light entertainment is inherently paedophilic in nature and Savile was a kind of plasticine creation we desired on many levels is one I agree with or not, there's enough elsewhere to be of real value to share.

[lipsink]

The recreation of all the kids grilling Saville on TV in the late 80s was quite something. I then went online and watched the real thing and fucking hell those are some savage questions the kids ask.

They seemed incredibly articulate and well informed (pre-social media/Internet as well). I've hardly ever seen any actual adults or professional interviewers completely destroy someone like that.

It's the perfect clip to show the sea change where Saville's screen persona just started to date and didn't really work anymore and he was just seen by kids as a creepy weirdo.

[bobloblaw]

The recreation of all the kids grilling Saville on TV in the late 80s was quite something. I then went online and watched the real thing and fucking hell those are some savage questions the kids ask.

They seemed incredibly articulate and well informed (pre-social media/Internet as well). I've hardly ever seen any actual adults or professional interviewers completely destroy someone like that.

It's the perfect clip to show the sea change where Saville's screen persona just started to date and didn't really work anymore and he was just seen by kids as a creepy weirdo.

got a link?

[lipsink]

got a link?

https://youtu.be/vBZ8M0G0FRQ?si=ykbLXPskssOk9-wH

[jobotic]

can't believe this program is how i found out about savile's misdeeds. i'm knock for six.

madhair seeing this is on iplayer. "Ooh I liked Jim'll Fix It and Top of the Pops. What a funny man he was. I've not got much on tonight, I'll watch it all in one go".

Sat at the end, eyes wet and mouth agape.

[Menu]

madhair seeing this is on iplayer. "Ooh I liked Jim'll Fix It and Top of the Pops. What a funny man he was. I've not got much on tonight, I'll watch it all in one go".

Sat at the end, eyes wet and mouth agape.

"Best wank ever."

[Menu]

Only seen the first episode so far, and I'm only watching because it's Coogan.

But I wish they'd left out the victims at the beginning and end. They should have more courage in the drama. I think the talking heads undermine it. If the drama itself is not articulate enough to get the point across, then get a better writer. Parading the victims just feels a bit weak.

Also at the end of the first episode there was a talking head by a guy called Kevin who, as far as I could see, hadn't featured as a character in the programme(unlike the other two talking heads). What was that all about?

And the Mother character felt off even before I read on here that there's no evidence that she disapproved of Jimmy at all. Why change that? I think it would have worked better - and been more shocking - if, as seemed to be the case, that the mother was very close to Savile, not weirdly undermining him. It almost gives Savile a sort of excuse for his crimes. It provides a sort of vulnerability which he doesn't deserve. Surely that can't have been the intention. Again it feels like a cowardly decision made by a committee rather than something that's true but awkward.

[Phoenix Lazarus]

at the end of the first episode there was a talking head by a guy called Kevin who, as far as I could see, hadn't featured as a character in the programme(unlike the other two talking heads). What was that all about?

His story is in a later instalment.

[Noodle Lizard]

But I wish they'd left out the victims at the beginning and end. They should have more courage in the drama. I think the talking heads undermine it. If the drama itself is not articulate enough to get the point across, then get a better writer. Parading the victims just feels a bit weak.

I expect it's at least partly to show that the actual victims are supportive of this drama being made. I'm in two minds about that myself.

Also at the end of the first episode there was a talking head by a guy called Kevin who, as far as I could see, hadn't featured as a character in the programme(unlike the other two talking heads). What was that all about?

I think his bit gets dramatized in a later episode.

[Menu]

His story is in a later instalment.

Oh right, cheers. That's just odd then. It made us both think we'd missed something major.

[Menu]

I expect it's at least partly to show that the actual victims are supportive of this drama being made. I'm in two minds about that myself.

Yes it felt like it was maybe imposed on the programme from higher up to head off any tabloid attacks. Just feels a bit rubbish and weak. Like they don't have the necessary confidence in the writing and acting.

[neveragain]

I think that's exactly what happened. The drama was retooled before broadcast during the hiatus.

[shoulders]

The recreation of all the kids grilling Saville on TV in the late 80s was quite something. I then went online and watched the real thing and fucking hell those are some savage questions the kids ask.

They seemed incredibly articulate and well informed (pre-social media/Internet as well). I've hardly ever seen any actual adults or professional interviewers completely destroy someone like that.

It's the perfect clip to show the sea change where Saville's screen persona just started to date and didn't really work anymore and he was just seen by kids as a creepy weirdo.

The show is quite good in general. There's another with Ian Botham where he clearly thinks it'll be a nice easy ride being fawned over by some kids then realises he's having to justify his shit opinions about drugs and animal cruelty. You can almost sense the moment he's chewed up by his own hubris.

[Head Gardener]

the signs were there