The latest
series of the BBC1 family history show "Who Do You Think You Are" has
clanked onto the screens rather like the unexpected special trains of the past
to holiday resorts during the August holiday's. A mystery to all except for
those in the station master's office who had not got around to announcing it.
It might well
be renamed "Where Do You Think You Are" in that while the first has
been screened, when the next will be, what or who are the persons featured is
another mystery. The BBC is not saying, around the web no hints and the actual
production company are all blank.
My box says it
is one of eight but no more and the schedule listings say there will be such a
programme but those forthcoming are another series. But given the lead time
between selecting the people for the show, making it, editing it both for BBC
screening and then commercial channel screening a lot can go wrong.
Especially, in
that it has become something of a celeb' fest, picking out famous faces from
popular TV shows and running the rule over their family histories, up to a
point. But in the internet age etc. today's loved and much followed celeb' can
be dust within hours or days if they make unwonted remarks on the social media
or have their collars felt by the fuzz for their very human weaknesses.
So did Wall To
Wall, the show's producers perhaps start with a series of ten or a dozen and
get unlucky as time progressed to finish up with eight to go and then very late
in the day lose one or more? I think we should be told.
The risks of
this have become much higher not just because of the concentration on celeb's
but the programmes are now High PC in their content not just in the few facts
we are now given but the history in question. We do get some facts, accessible
documents in archives, many now online, are what they are.
The history,
however, is another matter. The programmes are let us say, flexible in their
interpretation of the possibilities and way of life of long ago. One major
aspect is that they do individuals. But in the past our ancestors more often
functioned as a part of an extended family and its connected networks.
The lady in
the programme, Michelle Keegan, was found to have an Italian way back named
Parodi, who went from Genoa in Italy, who leaves his home to go to Gibraltar
and does very well. This is put down simply as a poor individual making good.
But there was a Parodi family in Genoa who were a local clan.
Given Genoa's
status as a major trading port and a wealth centre through the middle ages up
to the late 18th Century given the trading of that city along with the
Portuguese mariners on a world basis anyone pitching up in Gibraltar will have
had a long contacts list. Perhaps the programme did not want to get into the
detail as to what trades might have been involved.
The other
major part of the programme took us to Lancashire where Michelle could do the
accent being a local lass. Here we had the suffragettes linked to her Kirwan
ancestor, Emmeline Pankhurst's name being on the certificate. It was said she
was the Registrar, which implies much of the population would have had the same
connection.
But the 1911
Census has Elizabeth Kirwan as a Suffragist, hailed as being a statement of her
individuality. But the return was done by her husband, John, who might just
have had an Irish sense of humour. It also went against the Suffragettes
refusing to be recorded on the Census. But it did not finish there.
There was the
lady living in a street of rented houses, who was vital to the community of
working class people there in that she knew and was told everything and even
held the rent books. How wonderful. But I recall people like that. They
were often put in by the property owners as a supervisor and acted as their
information source and also the local copper's nark.
The programme
ticked all the PC boxes. I suspect we are in for a lot more of this with
swathes of real history either ignored or compressed to accord with our modern
model of thinking.
If you want to
clear your mind go to the Youtube Mitchell and Kenyon archive films of some of the
earliest moving pictures in the UK. I knew a few of that generation, they were
not what the BBC either like or want.
The other major part of the programme took us to Lancashire where Michelle could do the accent being a local lass.
ReplyDeleteWhich accent - Skelmersdale or Bootle?
Bootle has a certain je ne sais quoi lacking elsewhere. Michelle's was the other side of Lancashire north of a place whose name I dare not speak.
ReplyDeleteI agree, the Mitchell and Kenyon films suggest a world we cannot really know unless we knew a few from that generation. Others are bound to get it wrong.
ReplyDeleteAll the other dozens or hundreds of ancestors are ignored. In this case even the father and all his family were ignored. If you trawl back far enough in any family you are bound to find someone interesting. Especially if the production crew can get travel to nice places.
ReplyDelete