"A 21-century John Bull"? Credit: Neil Mockford/Alex Huckle/GC

“Ask Clarkson. Clarkson knows — people like fast cars, they like females with big boobies, and they don’t want the Euro, and that’s all there is to it.” This surmise, from Peep Show, captures the essence of Jeremy Clarkson’s Noughties appeal — approvingly for those who liked him, and scandalously for those who didn’t. The spawn and spokesman of the English male id. Insular, impudent and straightforward in taste. And if that weren’t enough, he was also into cigs, engines and the Second World War.
For the minority of a more severe, moralistic, and joyless disposition, this made him a national-psychological defect to be suppressed, or ideally exposed and exorcised. Before Piers Morgan, Nigel Farage or Donald Trump provided such stern competition, it was a small badge of honour on the Left to publicly hate Clarkson. But for many of us (probably a majority at his peak) he was a vulgar treat to indulge. For the length of a Sunday column or an episode of Top Gear, we could wallow harmlessly in the swamp of arrogant prejudice and self-gratification which sits at the bottom of the brain. At a time of minimal collective loyalty, the nation could reliably divide into those two tribes. Clarkson the monster, or Clarkson the geezer. Wokery vs blokery. A version of the same split is fuelling the current Clarkson row, but with the weight of opinion reversed.
Amazon, Clarkson’s primary current employer, now seems to have picked its side. His contract to make TV programmes about cars, farms and larks will reportedly not be renewed. There are rumours ITV may let him go too. We can suppose this is at least partly thanks to the nearly month-long storm over his astonishingly tasteless joke in The Sun about the Duchess of Sussex. For that, Clarkson has been granted no quarter by Harry, Meghan or their supporters. His first “rather put my foot in it” bumble was rejected. The Sun’s own “regret[ful]” memory-holing of the article was rejected. Even Clarkson’s last-gasp, hands-clasped grovel has been rejected, such is his history (they say) of “hate rhetoric”.
But his spiritual and popular appointment to the English is a far tougher thing to dismiss. He is, like it or not, quite a lot of us writ ludicrously, satirically large. Like a 21st-century John Bull: to paraphrase Auden, a self-confident, swaggering bully of meaty neck and clumsy jest. Whatever Clarkson’s professional fate, the question of whether our society can tolerate him has implications for the stomach and sensibility of the national character, of which he is a significant avatar and champion. And his rise and fall reads as a history of a changing English firmament, one in which public morality has come to supersede mere entertainment.
Plenty of time and work went into the germination of such a figure. Clarkson’s early life is a whistle-stop tour of the English class system. He was born rural, lower-middle class, Yorkshire. But, in a wonderful twist of fate, the Clarkson family came into money after his parents won the exclusive rights to sell Paddington Bear dolls, based on the ones they had made for him and his sister. With aspirational intent, Clarkson was sent to Repton, one of the North’s oldest private schools. There, he smoked, pranked and failed his way to expulsion, developing the likeable loutishness which is his career mainstay. And then he jumped social tracks again, entering the lowest rungs of the Fourth Estate at the Rotherham Advertiser.
A public schoolboy who can still boast that he crashed out of education with a C and two Us at A Level. The ingredients were in place for a broad, classless appeal. But Clarkson really came of professional age in the new meritocracy of Thatcher and Murdoch, a place where common touch came to supersede common background (something also exploited by Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage). It was an England of quick, coarse wit, and quicker, coarser money; of the triumphant red-top, and the unrepentant “lad”. It suited Clarkson perfectly. Flush with entrepreneurial spirit, in Eighties London he had the wheeze of syndicating car news and reviews from his own company to the regional press. It was a money-maker which introduced him to motoring journalism and eventually to the producers of Top Gear.
The programme was a staid, genuinely factual affair in those days. And Clarkson’s irreverence and wayward metaphors (a Porsche Boxster “couldn’t pull a greased stick out of a pig’s bottom”) set him apart. So cars led only further into showbiz, with a chat show, documentaries, newspaper columns and pop culture ubiquity to follow. By the time he reformatted Top Gear 20 years ago (and made it the BBC’s biggest global brand), he already had the privilege of being recognisable by silhouette alone. The stance: arms-crossed, in male-barbecuing or under-the-bonnet-inspecting mode. And the hair: the curly remnants of the kind of Englishman’s ‘fro which peaked in the Seventies.
England at the turn of the millennium was Clarkson’s home. It wanted entertainment, and it got it from the Victorian circus of Big Brother and X Factor, and from the sneers and stereotypes of Little Britain. Clarkson’s Top Gear, launched in 2002, was almost edifying by comparison. Its open secret was that it was not really about cars. Instead, Top Gear seemed to scoop the ersatz appeal of reality TV and gave you the life you wished you and your mates could live. All the rudeness, ribaldry and exotic travel you could want. And while clearly a masculine offering, 40% of viewers were women. English people weren’t just seeing their grainy selves mirrored back — in Clarkson and his lieutenants they saw a dream life.
Do they still? After multiple warnings — including for homophobia, xenophobia and the n-word — the BBC reached the end of its tether with the assault and abuse of a producer in 2015. Clarkson was initially undiminished. He was snapped up by a rich and ambitious streaming giant and instructed to make the same programme with more money. He took over Who Wants to be a Millionaire? and his collected journalism continued to be published (standing at eight volumes, the bestselling World According to Clarkson series must make its author the Proust of the pub bores). But the England that Clarkson once charmed was changing. Where once he was propelled by the forces of the contemporary, now he is encircled by them.
The principal feature of England in Clarkson’s imperial period was how apolitical it was. Electoral turnout fell; party memberships were tiny. Referendums proceeded according to plan. And the stability of New Labour’s long summer lent itself to a sense of consequence-free triviality. Under its aegis existed a crude cultural free-play. It was nasty, brutal and ephemeral, but in its own way quite funny, and even forgiving. So when, for example, he compared driving some svelte supercar to “smearing honey on Keira Knightley”, it was just good old Clarkson. Even when he said that striking workers should be “executed in front of their families” (a remark which yielded as many complaints as his Meghan column), it was, eventually and by enough people, forgotten.
But there has come a point when such lines aren’t provocative catnip anymore, but an embarrassing commercial risk. Once Clarkson could stomp on to any old landmine — from speed limits to lorry drivers murdering prostitutes — and walk away with his popular constituency intact. Now he’d find himself blown into the no man’s land of an interminable culture war. And his nose and instinct for provocation means he can’t keep clear of it. Even his bucolic “Farmer Clarkson” period landed him in the soup. Before this latest fracas, his farm restaurant was making headlines for irritating the Nimbys and planning laws of Oxfordshire, a foretaste of the coming clash over the ownership and purpose of the British countryside.
The rowdy, TV-tabloid moment Clarkson enjoyed is gone. The lives and affairs of the lowest celebrity, from footballer to stand-up, are no longer sub-political fun. And the subterranean Englishness Clarkson personified is on trial, its burly, vinegary instincts held responsible for Brexit and the politics of reaction it supposedly represents. Much of Clarkson’s constituency will dislike both Meghan and the gleeful violence of the column he wrote. But, in his apology to Meghan, Clarkson wrote that it is “hard to be interesting and vigilant at the same time”. It won’t wash with Harry or Meghan, but it will have spoken to his fans’ sense of alienation from the new set of rules that turned their hero into an ethical criminal.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeNonsense. I see no evidence of any major shift in opinion. Those who enjoy and appreciate Clarkson will only be offended that he apologised. He reflects – and will continue to reflect and enduring characteristic of English culture. At a time of increasing censorship, we should be grateful that there are people like this who still believe in free speech.
Anyone “offended” by Clarkson is taking life far too seriously.
Putting the clown role he plays aside, he is actually a very knowledgable motoring journalist. And unlike Harry, he writes his own stuff.
I certainly didn’t want him to apologise. Surely everyone has learned that apologies to the woke only emboldens them.
In that case, would that more people were as nice and wise as… Kathy Burke!
That can be taken two ways though, right? It can either be at face value, or be a clever way of implying that Woke is euphemism for being “an ignorant f*****g t**t.”, as Kathy Burke put it.
In that case, would that more people were as nice and wise as… Kathy Burke!
That can be taken two ways though, right? It can either be at face value, or be a clever way of implying that Woke is euphemism for being “an ignorant f*****g t**t.”, as Kathy Burke put it.
“Anyone “offended” by Clarkson is taking life far too seriously.”
Yes, but this is not naivete, it is instead an entirely deliberate and cynical means of exercising political power. The outrage is entirely confected and is in the service of the eradication of free speech for anyone unwise enough to argue with Liberal-Left morals (if they can be described as such at all, but that’s another debate).
The people who do this can’t be corrected by kindly explaining to them the difference between a joke and serious intent: they are not stupid and they know this perfectly well already. They can only be defeated by treating their complaints as intellectually dishonest claptrap, but unfortunately the people at the top whose reactions actually count depend for their position on Liberal-Left patronage, so they will take the faux-outrage at face value. It’s all very well saying that millions of people side with Clarkson here (I do myself), but those millions of people aren’t the ones capable of signing lucrative TV deals, so unfortunately Jeremy has just cost himself an awful lot of money.
You also sense that there’s an element of professional jealousy at work here – the hordes of mediocre journalists who resent Clarkson’s fame/wealth/success. Much as they did with Boris Johnson. That’s not to excuse Clarkson and Johnson’s faults. Just to point out that the critics also have their own agendas – including this one.
I suspect Amazon prime want the film rights to Spare. It’s all about the money. Jeremy Clarkson doesn’t sell in the US particularly well.
Clarkson’s Farm doesn’t sell in the USA but that is hardly any surprise given that its popularity in Britain is because it’s about Britain.
The Grand Tour is more popular in the USA of course, but the real reason Clarkson will probably do OK without Amazon is that he built a genuinely global following with Top Gear – it peaked at over 350million people in over 200 countries – a number that the subsequent versions of Top Gear never came close to once Clarkson Hammond and May left the show, and not incidentally the most successful export of the televised BBC brand globally in its entire history.
His global market still exists and there seems no reason why this could not be leveraged through a non-traditional broadcaster and simply circumvent the po-faced class of media clowns who don’t like him. Youtube is an obvious alternative but even that might still run into corporate Wokery, but since Clarkson is such a huge brand in himself even an unknown label would be fine as long as it has the technical capacity to broadcast at scale.
In short, I believe that Clarkson is probably uncancellable: he doesn’t just have a large following, that following is spread over the globe in many places where Woke morality has no traction.
I really liked his farm show. I had no idea Lamborghini made tractors. US of A here
Apparently not very good tractors, if the show is any guide.
But I’m surprised you haven’t heard the apocryphal story of how Ferrucio Lamborghini came to start making sports cars? It was because he was a truck and tractor manufacturer in 1960s Italy and he asked one of his mechanics to change the clutch on his Ferrari, finding the correct parts first. The mechanic did this and then told him that actually they already had the clutch in stock because Ferrari used the same clutch in its cars as Lamborghini did in its tractors.
Apparently this was a lightbulb moment for Ferrucio, who then decided that he’d like to make sports cars too since he clearly already had the factory and the skills to do so. The rest is history.
Lamborgini started as a tractor manufacturer
Apparently not very good tractors, if the show is any guide.
But I’m surprised you haven’t heard the apocryphal story of how Ferrucio Lamborghini came to start making sports cars? It was because he was a truck and tractor manufacturer in 1960s Italy and he asked one of his mechanics to change the clutch on his Ferrari, finding the correct parts first. The mechanic did this and then told him that actually they already had the clutch in stock because Ferrari used the same clutch in its cars as Lamborghini did in its tractors.
Apparently this was a lightbulb moment for Ferrucio, who then decided that he’d like to make sports cars too since he clearly already had the factory and the skills to do so. The rest is history.
Lamborgini started as a tractor manufacturer
There’s always Geebeebies.
I really liked his farm show. I had no idea Lamborghini made tractors. US of A here
There’s always Geebeebies.
I’m in the US and I like him but I’m an outlier.
Very good point
Clarkson’s Farm doesn’t sell in the USA but that is hardly any surprise given that its popularity in Britain is because it’s about Britain.
The Grand Tour is more popular in the USA of course, but the real reason Clarkson will probably do OK without Amazon is that he built a genuinely global following with Top Gear – it peaked at over 350million people in over 200 countries – a number that the subsequent versions of Top Gear never came close to once Clarkson Hammond and May left the show, and not incidentally the most successful export of the televised BBC brand globally in its entire history.
His global market still exists and there seems no reason why this could not be leveraged through a non-traditional broadcaster and simply circumvent the po-faced class of media clowns who don’t like him. Youtube is an obvious alternative but even that might still run into corporate Wokery, but since Clarkson is such a huge brand in himself even an unknown label would be fine as long as it has the technical capacity to broadcast at scale.
In short, I believe that Clarkson is probably uncancellable: he doesn’t just have a large following, that following is spread over the globe in many places where Woke morality has no traction.
I’m in the US and I like him but I’m an outlier.
Very good point
You also sense that there’s an element of professional jealousy at work here – the hordes of mediocre journalists who resent Clarkson’s fame/wealth/success. Much as they did with Boris Johnson. That’s not to excuse Clarkson and Johnson’s faults. Just to point out that the critics also have their own agendas – including this one.
I suspect Amazon prime want the film rights to Spare. It’s all about the money. Jeremy Clarkson doesn’t sell in the US particularly well.
He may be a knowledgable motoring journalist but you don’t need to know much to write about cars. There’s no escaping the fact that what he wrote about MM was disgusting, mediaeval and wrong and he deserved the heavy artillery that’s come his way since. It’s not good enough to dismiss it as a joke, it was a cruel and brutish suggestion, which belonged in the 12th century and was not funny in any way. It will have swayed favour towards MM.
Basically he’s a nasty character with a lot of TV charisma. He’s used his popularity to expound his gross, multiple bigotries, which have often enhanced his popularity.
I enjoyed his farming programmes. He controlled his nasty side all through those.
So, you managed to enjoy a farming programme presented by someone who you already knew to be ‘a nasty character’ who’s guilty of ‘multiple bigotries’, did you? How fascinating!
Why is it facinating? Did not Mr Williams say that he controlled his nasty side during these programmes? I cannot comment as I haven’t seen them myself, I tend, now, to avoid anything staring Mr Clarkson.
Why is it facinating? Did not Mr Williams say that he controlled his nasty side during these programmes? I cannot comment as I haven’t seen them myself, I tend, now, to avoid anything staring Mr Clarkson.
OK, so if it’s that easy writing about cars, how about you have a go ? Here. Now. 1000 words on “Is the Italian car industry in terminal decline ?”. Or “was the Alfasud really the Car of the Seventies as Top Gear claimed ?”. Your choice.
I was in Italy during the Alfasud fiasco. Northern Italians wouldn’t buy it because it was made by southern Italians.
I was in Italy during the Alfasud fiasco. Northern Italians wouldn’t buy it because it was made by southern Italians.
“He may be a knowledgable motoring journalist but you don’t need to know much to write about cars.”
Clearly said by someone who knows so little about the subject that such an assertion can seem reasonable.
I resemble that remark about my 12th century ancestors, who, were they alive, would turn in their graves. Please desist with this cultural appropriation and stereotyping in future. Yours in diversity, inclusion and equality (DIE).
If they were alive, they’d prefer getting out of their graves than turning sadly within them.
I made curry last night.Was that cultural appropriation?
Diversity is our strength and cultural enrichment is good.
Englishmen have been eating curry since the time of Chaucer.
Crusades, in fact. They brought 5he herbs and spices and recipes home.
Crusades, in fact. They brought 5he herbs and spices and recipes home.
Englishmen have been eating curry since the time of Chaucer.
Heh, good joke. “If Chaucer were alive today, he’d be turning in his grave”
You can’t beat the old ones.
That’s what the sign in the care home says, anyway.
Good one.
If they were alive, they’d prefer getting out of their graves than turning sadly within them.
I made curry last night.Was that cultural appropriation?
Diversity is our strength and cultural enrichment is good.
Heh, good joke. “If Chaucer were alive today, he’d be turning in his grave”
You can’t beat the old ones.
That’s what the sign in the care home says, anyway.
Good one.
Actually, to be a good motoring journalist, you do need to know a lot about cars, the industry in general and the people and politics within. Add to that an ability to entertain and connect with your audience, and you become good at the job. Underestimating what it takes to do any job well is not unusual. In this case, you appear to have done just that with the aim of discrediting JC.
On the contrary, you need to know a lot about cars to be as good a motoring journalist as Clarkson, not a subject in which you can wing it.
And for f/sake, he made a joke, not a very nice one or good one and he failed to make a footnote of the context so the terminally humourless could realise where it came from (not the C12th).
He’s a comedian now as much as a journalist. Which is a skill that the California Two could usefully learn
They knew full well what he was referencing.
They knew full well what he was referencing.
I wont lower myself to comment on this…..
That makes two of us!
That makes two of us!
Trevor I can’t stand Clarkson therefore I do not watch or read anything by him.But the response by ‘the great and good’ wokeraty was pathetic.He is an offensive privileged male who has every right to express his bilge, but to cancel him?
I am delighted that he offends you: those who take offence are put on this planet, to be the butt of mick takers.. Thanks Ron, where would we be without you to laugh at?
I am delighted that he offends you: those who take offence are put on this planet, to be the butt of mick takers.. Thanks Ron, where would we be without you to laugh at?
Ohh, you’ve managed to upset a few people. I don’t know if you’re correct about not needing to know much to write about cars, but you are correct when you point out Mr Clarkson’s nasty side, although I’ve never found him particulary charismatic.
Anyone who’s had a sense of humour bypass should definitely give Clarkson a wide berth.
I enjoyed Harry and Meghan’s wedding on the day..for the same reason.
So, you managed to enjoy a farming programme presented by someone who you already knew to be ‘a nasty character’ who’s guilty of ‘multiple bigotries’, did you? How fascinating!
OK, so if it’s that easy writing about cars, how about you have a go ? Here. Now. 1000 words on “Is the Italian car industry in terminal decline ?”. Or “was the Alfasud really the Car of the Seventies as Top Gear claimed ?”. Your choice.
“He may be a knowledgable motoring journalist but you don’t need to know much to write about cars.”
Clearly said by someone who knows so little about the subject that such an assertion can seem reasonable.
I resemble that remark about my 12th century ancestors, who, were they alive, would turn in their graves. Please desist with this cultural appropriation and stereotyping in future. Yours in diversity, inclusion and equality (DIE).
Actually, to be a good motoring journalist, you do need to know a lot about cars, the industry in general and the people and politics within. Add to that an ability to entertain and connect with your audience, and you become good at the job. Underestimating what it takes to do any job well is not unusual. In this case, you appear to have done just that with the aim of discrediting JC.
On the contrary, you need to know a lot about cars to be as good a motoring journalist as Clarkson, not a subject in which you can wing it.
And for f/sake, he made a joke, not a very nice one or good one and he failed to make a footnote of the context so the terminally humourless could realise where it came from (not the C12th).
He’s a comedian now as much as a journalist. Which is a skill that the California Two could usefully learn
I wont lower myself to comment on this…..
Trevor I can’t stand Clarkson therefore I do not watch or read anything by him.But the response by ‘the great and good’ wokeraty was pathetic.He is an offensive privileged male who has every right to express his bilge, but to cancel him?
Ohh, you’ve managed to upset a few people. I don’t know if you’re correct about not needing to know much to write about cars, but you are correct when you point out Mr Clarkson’s nasty side, although I’ve never found him particulary charismatic.
Anyone who’s had a sense of humour bypass should definitely give Clarkson a wide berth.
I enjoyed Harry and Meghan’s wedding on the day..for the same reason.
He compared driving some svelte supercar to “smearing honey on Keira Knightley” : )
Many years ago – it was reasonably acceptable at the time!!
By whom? I’m not offended by what he says. Offence doesn’t come in to it. Seems to me from reading this lot that anyone who finds this loathsome, foul mouthed individual unpleasant is “in the service of the eradication of free speech.” What drivel and how lucky to have a convenient catagory to slot us into. I’m red hot on free speech. Just find this man a nasty, self opinionated pratt. Yuk!
Depends on whether you are one of the “he shouldn’t say that” or the “he can’t say that” people.
If you’re in the second then you definitely do oppose freedom of speech. From the sound of it you’re in the first group so you don’t oppose it, but the important point here is to note that just because you yourself aren’t against freedom of speech, that doesn’t mean there aren’t many others who are.
Do you actually know him? Have you met him?
Depends on whether you are one of the “he shouldn’t say that” or the “he can’t say that” people.
If you’re in the second then you definitely do oppose freedom of speech. From the sound of it you’re in the first group so you don’t oppose it, but the important point here is to note that just because you yourself aren’t against freedom of speech, that doesn’t mean there aren’t many others who are.
Do you actually know him? Have you met him?
and still is
By whom? I’m not offended by what he says. Offence doesn’t come in to it. Seems to me from reading this lot that anyone who finds this loathsome, foul mouthed individual unpleasant is “in the service of the eradication of free speech.” What drivel and how lucky to have a convenient catagory to slot us into. I’m red hot on free speech. Just find this man a nasty, self opinionated pratt. Yuk!
and still is
And ? Last time I checked we still had free speech in this country. No one’s forcing you (or me) to read or watch him. I won’t be reading “Spare” for the same reason.
Unfortunately the only way you can avoid more H&M drivel in the UK is to avoid any and all broadcast news or discussion program.
Unfortunately the only way you can avoid more H&M drivel in the UK is to avoid any and all broadcast news or discussion program.
Many years ago – it was reasonably acceptable at the time!!
And ? Last time I checked we still had free speech in this country. No one’s forcing you (or me) to read or watch him. I won’t be reading “Spare” for the same reason.
What really got up H&M and the wokies’ noses was that he made a joke of his apology. They will never be satisfied with anything less than sackcloth and ashes. So there’s no point in trying to placate them. He was really trying to rescue his Amazon contract. It’s worth a shot applying to Netflix. He could write and present his commentary on Harry’s “sobumentaries”. That that could be a money spinner.
If Amazon cancel him then he’ll be snapped up by someone else because as you suggest, there is a market for him, so I disagree with the author. But yeah, he should never have apologised.
Absolutely on the money. Outside of the MSM, Clarkson still is the anti-Woke mouthpiece for the Demos.
Very funny, rather silly & very British. The Chiswick Brigade have not seen the last of him, try as they might.
I don’t inhabit “woke” territory, but I know of only one person who has any time for the man, so please to not equate him with being very British.
You probably come from the wrong part of the social scale…
What’s the wrong part, then?
What’s the wrong part, then?
You probably come from the wrong part of the social scale…
I don’t inhabit “woke” territory, but I know of only one person who has any time for the man, so please to not equate him with being very British.
just find it tragic and perplexing that many British people want to get Americanized. There should be some international emergency to preserve British humor and British ways – I can’t bear to imagine the insipid and purgatorial world without it. And personally, I cannot get enough of Hammond, Clarkson, and May. (US immigrant woman). (P.S. please watch -any- American car show in order to see the brilliance of these guys – and I don’t even care much for cars)
I certainly didn’t want him to apologise. Surely everyone has learned that apologies to the woke only emboldens them.
“Anyone “offended” by Clarkson is taking life far too seriously.”
Yes, but this is not naivete, it is instead an entirely deliberate and cynical means of exercising political power. The outrage is entirely confected and is in the service of the eradication of free speech for anyone unwise enough to argue with Liberal-Left morals (if they can be described as such at all, but that’s another debate).
The people who do this can’t be corrected by kindly explaining to them the difference between a joke and serious intent: they are not stupid and they know this perfectly well already. They can only be defeated by treating their complaints as intellectually dishonest claptrap, but unfortunately the people at the top whose reactions actually count depend for their position on Liberal-Left patronage, so they will take the faux-outrage at face value. It’s all very well saying that millions of people side with Clarkson here (I do myself), but those millions of people aren’t the ones capable of signing lucrative TV deals, so unfortunately Jeremy has just cost himself an awful lot of money.
He may be a knowledgable motoring journalist but you don’t need to know much to write about cars. There’s no escaping the fact that what he wrote about MM was disgusting, mediaeval and wrong and he deserved the heavy artillery that’s come his way since. It’s not good enough to dismiss it as a joke, it was a cruel and brutish suggestion, which belonged in the 12th century and was not funny in any way. It will have swayed favour towards MM.
Basically he’s a nasty character with a lot of TV charisma. He’s used his popularity to expound his gross, multiple bigotries, which have often enhanced his popularity.
I enjoyed his farming programmes. He controlled his nasty side all through those.
He compared driving some svelte supercar to “smearing honey on Keira Knightley” : )
What really got up H&M and the wokies’ noses was that he made a joke of his apology. They will never be satisfied with anything less than sackcloth and ashes. So there’s no point in trying to placate them. He was really trying to rescue his Amazon contract. It’s worth a shot applying to Netflix. He could write and present his commentary on Harry’s “sobumentaries”. That that could be a money spinner.
If Amazon cancel him then he’ll be snapped up by someone else because as you suggest, there is a market for him, so I disagree with the author. But yeah, he should never have apologised.
Absolutely on the money. Outside of the MSM, Clarkson still is the anti-Woke mouthpiece for the Demos.
Very funny, rather silly & very British. The Chiswick Brigade have not seen the last of him, try as they might.
just find it tragic and perplexing that many British people want to get Americanized. There should be some international emergency to preserve British humor and British ways – I can’t bear to imagine the insipid and purgatorial world without it. And personally, I cannot get enough of Hammond, Clarkson, and May. (US immigrant woman). (P.S. please watch -any- American car show in order to see the brilliance of these guys – and I don’t even care much for cars)
Nonsense. I see no evidence of any major shift in opinion. Those who enjoy and appreciate Clarkson will only be offended that he apologised. He reflects – and will continue to reflect and enduring characteristic of English culture. At a time of increasing censorship, we should be grateful that there are people like this who still believe in free speech.
Anyone “offended” by Clarkson is taking life far too seriously.
Putting the clown role he plays aside, he is actually a very knowledgable motoring journalist. And unlike Harry, he writes his own stuff.
Poking fun at the pretensions of a self-important elite has always been central to our humour.
For decades Clarkson has almost single-handedly provided an antidote to the sanctimonious pomposity of the UK media class. He went too far in his attack on the toxic twosome – but he needs to be rehabilitated if we don’t want to live in a culture utterly dominated by James O’Brien, Emily Maitlis et al and entertained by establishment sycophants like Nish Kumar.
He didn’t “go too far”. He called a spade a spade, and told it straight.
Or we dont watch the telly!! We’ve long abandoned television and radio for the reasons you mention. They both sit gathering dust in the house. My last listen to a radio four afternoon play was on a long drive home from Leeds. I nearly crashed the car in rage at the content, turned it off and never turned it on again. Id already lost patience with Radio3 content when the insufferable presentation of a request programme finished it for me.. Shame. Radio used to be a pleasant part of my life.
“He went too far in his attack on the toxic twosome”
No he fvcking well didn’t.
He didn’t go too far for him. He is often like this, rather obnoxious..
a bit your your po faced super petite bourgeoise sensibilities!
So, any opinion that you disagree with is po faced super petite bourgeoise. I shall say it again “he can be rather obnoxious”, if you find that your sensibilities are offended by that then it’s your problem not mine.
So, any opinion that you disagree with is po faced super petite bourgeoise. I shall say it again “he can be rather obnoxious”, if you find that your sensibilities are offended by that then it’s your problem not mine.
a bit your your po faced super petite bourgeoise sensibilities!
He didn’t go too far for him. He is often like this, rather obnoxious..
He didn’t “go too far”. He called a spade a spade, and told it straight.
Or we dont watch the telly!! We’ve long abandoned television and radio for the reasons you mention. They both sit gathering dust in the house. My last listen to a radio four afternoon play was on a long drive home from Leeds. I nearly crashed the car in rage at the content, turned it off and never turned it on again. Id already lost patience with Radio3 content when the insufferable presentation of a request programme finished it for me.. Shame. Radio used to be a pleasant part of my life.
“He went too far in his attack on the toxic twosome”
No he fvcking well didn’t.
Poking fun at the pretensions of a self-important elite has always been central to our humour.
For decades Clarkson has almost single-handedly provided an antidote to the sanctimonious pomposity of the UK media class. He went too far in his attack on the toxic twosome – but he needs to be rehabilitated if we don’t want to live in a culture utterly dominated by James O’Brien, Emily Maitlis et al and entertained by establishment sycophants like Nish Kumar.
Wokeness = Misery
A good article. I want to embrace a Clarksonian spirit of defiance but I cannot. His defeat – and his wretched apology to the high priests of toxic identitarianism – is yet another marke of the ending of free speech in the UK. It is over. Ever since the liberals and BBC bowed to the first hate mob – the Rushdie book burners- we have seen the new cult like dogmas on race gender identity progressively eliminate any form of dissent from books plays films TV. The BBC will not use the word Muslim or Islam in its reports on terror attacks. Police hound people over tweats. Why dont we acknowledge that the battle is lost?? We cannot ever win because these new credos are pulsing out from State LAW – notably the Equality Acts from 2010. And belief in a whole new ideology – identitarianism, social justice, anti discrimination, anti meritocracy, anti wealth creation, welfarism and bailout culture, the EU’s precautionary principle and regulation, a culture of victimhood greviance and entitlement – is held by ALL political parties and everyone in the UK State!!!! So political parties as constituted are irrelevant. We now inhabit a de facto One Party State with a detached elite in their 3million London dachas. I honestly think this explains why nothing is changing. We are not so different from a Poland or Hungary in the 1980s (minus only the secret police). UK 2023 = USSR 1989.
You can mention “both” political parties
But not all. Reform Party dure does not not embrace those totems.
Who?
Very true. But they are not in Parliament. Remember there are over 80 Liberal Democrats in the Lords and a ragbag of Scots who also form part of the One Dogma Ruling clerisy. Look closer at how much the modern Tories, Labour, Lib Dems SNP and their overlords in civil service now all agree on. Hard lockdown tyranny. Net Zero extremism and climate catastrophism. Reverse racist Harry style multiculturalism. Mass feminization of workforce without childcare. Anti meritocracy and class war on rich. Brownite welfarism and benefit bailouts. Bailouts. Brownite high tax. Statism. Antipathy to private enterprise and wealth creation. EU style judicial intervention and supremacy. The EU precautionary principle and risk aversion. The crippling Equality ideology and anti discrimination mania. The extension of the unelected governing technocracy. Tolerance of and passivity militant identitarianism as minimum. Censorship – esp on Islam and tactit disavowal of free speech. Er – what is left???? This covers everything. That is their Groupthink. The unacknowledged One State Party possesses ALL.
Who?
Very true. But they are not in Parliament. Remember there are over 80 Liberal Democrats in the Lords and a ragbag of Scots who also form part of the One Dogma Ruling clerisy. Look closer at how much the modern Tories, Labour, Lib Dems SNP and their overlords in civil service now all agree on. Hard lockdown tyranny. Net Zero extremism and climate catastrophism. Reverse racist Harry style multiculturalism. Mass feminization of workforce without childcare. Anti meritocracy and class war on rich. Brownite welfarism and benefit bailouts. Bailouts. Brownite high tax. Statism. Antipathy to private enterprise and wealth creation. EU style judicial intervention and supremacy. The EU precautionary principle and risk aversion. The crippling Equality ideology and anti discrimination mania. The extension of the unelected governing technocracy. Tolerance of and passivity militant identitarianism as minimum. Censorship – esp on Islam and tactit disavowal of free speech. Er – what is left???? This covers everything. That is their Groupthink. The unacknowledged One State Party possesses ALL.
Die Gedanken sind frei.
This is frighteningly correct and would suggest a grim or violent future for this country.
The Woke Age is defined by its ‘humorlessness’.
The Woke Age is defined by its ‘humorlessness’.
I think yore being very hopeful about the secret police.
“…minus only the secret police”
How do you know if the police are secret?
It’s kind of in the name, but I see your point. Aren’t some police departments in the UK monitoring people’s online content?
It’s kind of in the name, but I see your point. Aren’t some police departments in the UK monitoring people’s online content?
Secret police not needed. Replaced by mass online surveillance and about-to-be introduced CBDCs.
You can mention “both” political parties
But not all. Reform Party dure does not not embrace those totems.
Die Gedanken sind frei.
This is frighteningly correct and would suggest a grim or violent future for this country.
I think yore being very hopeful about the secret police.
“…minus only the secret police”
How do you know if the police are secret?
Secret police not needed. Replaced by mass online surveillance and about-to-be introduced CBDCs.
A good article. I want to embrace a Clarksonian spirit of defiance but I cannot. His defeat – and his wretched apology to the high priests of toxic identitarianism – is yet another marke of the ending of free speech in the UK. It is over. Ever since the liberals and BBC bowed to the first hate mob – the Rushdie book burners- we have seen the new cult like dogmas on race gender identity progressively eliminate any form of dissent from books plays films TV. The BBC will not use the word Muslim or Islam in its reports on terror attacks. Police hound people over tweats. Why dont we acknowledge that the battle is lost?? We cannot ever win because these new credos are pulsing out from State LAW – notably the Equality Acts from 2010. And belief in a whole new ideology – identitarianism, social justice, anti discrimination, anti meritocracy, anti wealth creation, welfarism and bailout culture, the EU’s precautionary principle and regulation, a culture of victimhood greviance and entitlement – is held by ALL political parties and everyone in the UK State!!!! So political parties as constituted are irrelevant. We now inhabit a de facto One Party State with a detached elite in their 3million London dachas. I honestly think this explains why nothing is changing. We are not so different from a Poland or Hungary in the 1980s (minus only the secret police). UK 2023 = USSR 1989.
Wokeness = Misery
Hmmm. You do know Clarkson was an ardent Remainer, don’t you? To his credit, once the deal was done he suggested we all just get on with it, as you might expect.
The part Nicholas misses about Clarkson is this; he’s actually a very good journalist. He can take on and explain virtually any subject and make it relatable to the vast majority of Britons. Especially those who live outside of the M25 and university cities. I’m not wildly interested in cars or farming, but will happily watch Clarkson talk about both.
I wouldn’t write him off quite yet. I suspect there’s another act left in the old warhorse.
I really hope so as it would be boring without him!
Remainers fine. There were reasons to Remain as well as reasons to Leave. The debate was had, the decisions made. Remoaners are a different matter.
I voted Remain but am nonetheless OK with Brexit having happened, as in my view Britain never should have been allowed in in the first place. In England, there is simply too much cultural contempt for mainland Europe for it ever to work. I just wish the leavers would quit moaning about the EU.
I’m a Remoaner, but not for political reasons, for purely practical ones. It’s all very well for the leavers to bang on about all of the opportunities that Brexit was going to bring, but the government that was supposed to take those opportunities has failed disasterously.
Whining about Covid and Putin won’t cut it, even the nuclei of nascent projects for a great future for the UK as yet do not exist in any physical form at all. As a result, the polls show an ever increasing majority of opinion to return to the EU. It’s at around 20% higher than Leave right now, and set to increase. Interestingly, the change is due to (pragmatic rather than emotional) Leave voters who have changed their minds, the “Don’t knows” remain at around 10% as they always have. How long can Westminster withstand this political pressure?
So, dear Leaver, I wish you had proven me wrong and made Brexit a great success for the country, I could have lived with that. I think no less of you for believing in an exciting project and trying to make change for the better my fellow countryman, but instead it’s a total and abject failure and you are now flogging a dead horse.
What are we supposed to do now, sit around and twiddle our thumbs while ignoring the elephant in the room in fear that the mere mention of it might irritate a Leaver? Or do we to do something positive for the country, be that find someone, anyone who can govern and actually work with the Brexit opportunities? Or return to something like the EU that was admittedly flawed but at least worked, unlike our current rapidly failing system. Soon we will be poorer and less relevent than Poland.
Here’s an idea to heal our society – don’t just blindly attack people who see things differently to you, suggest something useful for our country instead and lets work together to achieve it.
What did the Common Market, the EEC and the EU do for the economic growth of the UK?
20 years before joining the Common Market the average annual increase of GDP was 3.3%
In the 20 years after joining tEurope our average annual increase was 2.9%
From joining the Single Market to the year before the Bankers’ induced collapse of the economy the average Annul increase was 2.3%
These figures are from the ONS
“What did the Common Market, the EEC and the EU do for the economic growth of the UK?”
I feel a Monty Python sketch coming on.
You cannot compare the post ww2 period of massive infrastructure rebuilding with a period blighted with the oil price inflationary effect.
“What did the Common Market, the EEC and the EU do for the economic growth of the UK?”
I feel a Monty Python sketch coming on.
You cannot compare the post ww2 period of massive infrastructure rebuilding with a period blighted with the oil price inflationary effect.
A long comment justifying an elitist undemocratic mindset. Democracy only works if losers consent. When they don’t there is no point with elections.or referenda. Just have a first fight in the street and let winner decide. I assume that’s your preference.
The entire history of this country has been about making those who rule a little bit accountable to those they rule over. All Brexit has to do is prevent that tradition from being nullified. To the extent that we have recovered at least a degree of self-determination, Brexit is already successful.
What did the Common Market, the EEC and the EU do for the economic growth of the UK?
20 years before joining the Common Market the average annual increase of GDP was 3.3%
In the 20 years after joining tEurope our average annual increase was 2.9%
From joining the Single Market to the year before the Bankers’ induced collapse of the economy the average Annul increase was 2.3%
These figures are from the ONS
A long comment justifying an elitist undemocratic mindset. Democracy only works if losers consent. When they don’t there is no point with elections.or referenda. Just have a first fight in the street and let winner decide. I assume that’s your preference.
The entire history of this country has been about making those who rule a little bit accountable to those they rule over. All Brexit has to do is prevent that tradition from being nullified. To the extent that we have recovered at least a degree of self-determination, Brexit is already successful.
Quite right.
I voted Remain but am nonetheless OK with Brexit having happened, as in my view Britain never should have been allowed in in the first place. In England, there is simply too much cultural contempt for mainland Europe for it ever to work. I just wish the leavers would quit moaning about the EU.
I’m a Remoaner, but not for political reasons, for purely practical ones. It’s all very well for the leavers to bang on about all of the opportunities that Brexit was going to bring, but the government that was supposed to take those opportunities has failed disasterously.
Whining about Covid and Putin won’t cut it, even the nuclei of nascent projects for a great future for the UK as yet do not exist in any physical form at all. As a result, the polls show an ever increasing majority of opinion to return to the EU. It’s at around 20% higher than Leave right now, and set to increase. Interestingly, the change is due to (pragmatic rather than emotional) Leave voters who have changed their minds, the “Don’t knows” remain at around 10% as they always have. How long can Westminster withstand this political pressure?
So, dear Leaver, I wish you had proven me wrong and made Brexit a great success for the country, I could have lived with that. I think no less of you for believing in an exciting project and trying to make change for the better my fellow countryman, but instead it’s a total and abject failure and you are now flogging a dead horse.
What are we supposed to do now, sit around and twiddle our thumbs while ignoring the elephant in the room in fear that the mere mention of it might irritate a Leaver? Or do we to do something positive for the country, be that find someone, anyone who can govern and actually work with the Brexit opportunities? Or return to something like the EU that was admittedly flawed but at least worked, unlike our current rapidly failing system. Soon we will be poorer and less relevent than Poland.
Here’s an idea to heal our society – don’t just blindly attack people who see things differently to you, suggest something useful for our country instead and lets work together to achieve it.
Quite right.
Oh I do hope not.
I really hope so as it would be boring without him!
Remainers fine. There were reasons to Remain as well as reasons to Leave. The debate was had, the decisions made. Remoaners are a different matter.
Oh I do hope not.
Hmmm. You do know Clarkson was an ardent Remainer, don’t you? To his credit, once the deal was done he suggested we all just get on with it, as you might expect.
The part Nicholas misses about Clarkson is this; he’s actually a very good journalist. He can take on and explain virtually any subject and make it relatable to the vast majority of Britons. Especially those who live outside of the M25 and university cities. I’m not wildly interested in cars or farming, but will happily watch Clarkson talk about both.
I wouldn’t write him off quite yet. I suspect there’s another act left in the old warhorse.
Who put the vacuous and vicious H&M in charge of telling us what’s proper and what isn’t ?
“Pot kettle”, “Do as I say”, “Take the beam”, and all that.
You’d rather King Tampon Charles do that?
Do one, wokey. Nobody’s putting up with you any more.
Do one, wokey. Nobody’s putting up with you any more.
You’d rather King Tampon Charles do that?
Who put the vacuous and vicious H&M in charge of telling us what’s proper and what isn’t ?
“Pot kettle”, “Do as I say”, “Take the beam”, and all that.
The generational divide on these issues which Clarkson was writing about in the offending article was graphically illustrated when his own daughter popped up on social media to denounce him. But then people will repay the loyalty shown to them. The religion of Woke appeals to the younger generation because no alternative value set was ever taught or demonstrated to them.
Given Clarkson is divorced from her mother, there may be other factors at play!
Given Clarkson is divorced from her mother, there may be other factors at play!
The generational divide on these issues which Clarkson was writing about in the offending article was graphically illustrated when his own daughter popped up on social media to denounce him. But then people will repay the loyalty shown to them. The religion of Woke appeals to the younger generation because no alternative value set was ever taught or demonstrated to them.
The fictional John Falstaff was important enough to be included in three of Shakespeare’s plays. Not as a hero but as a counterpart to the hero.
How bland and sterile would our society be without the likes of Jeremy Clarkson, Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson?
It seems clear that bland sterility is something a great many opinion formers actually want. The same applies to arguments about Net Zero for instance: those objecting say things like “it’ll cause economic collapse”, and “it’ll destroy people’s living standards and personal liberty” etc.
The problem is that people who make such objections are doing so to an elite class of people whose attitude is that they want all this to happen: they actually WANT to sit atop a society of serfs whose only means of living depend upon the patronage of said elite. This elite doesn’t want a population with economic choices and the bad habit of thinking for itself.
Or to own their own vehicle and be free to travel where they want without permission
Or to own their own vehicle and be free to travel where they want without permission
I’m of the “Whatever gets you through the night, it’s alright” – (so long as you are not bothering anyone else) persuasion, so I hold no prejudices against anyone. Some would probably accuse me of being PC for that.
I’m also Gen-X, so pretty difficult to offend, so I have to admit you are right, everything is getting a bit boring now.
It seems clear that bland sterility is something a great many opinion formers actually want. The same applies to arguments about Net Zero for instance: those objecting say things like “it’ll cause economic collapse”, and “it’ll destroy people’s living standards and personal liberty” etc.
The problem is that people who make such objections are doing so to an elite class of people whose attitude is that they want all this to happen: they actually WANT to sit atop a society of serfs whose only means of living depend upon the patronage of said elite. This elite doesn’t want a population with economic choices and the bad habit of thinking for itself.
I’m of the “Whatever gets you through the night, it’s alright” – (so long as you are not bothering anyone else) persuasion, so I hold no prejudices against anyone. Some would probably accuse me of being PC for that.
I’m also Gen-X, so pretty difficult to offend, so I have to admit you are right, everything is getting a bit boring now.
The fictional John Falstaff was important enough to be included in three of Shakespeare’s plays. Not as a hero but as a counterpart to the hero.
How bland and sterile would our society be without the likes of Jeremy Clarkson, Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson?
Classic blinkered, leftist lower middle class, chippy woke gospel: The truth is the diametric opposite to what this piece says.
Clarkson is one of the very few public figures who actually reflects and represents the now stifled, fear ridden, ” cancelled” views of the majority of Britons, not least at both ” horseshoe” ends of the socio demograph, but more significantly has the guts, courage, backbone and wry cynical humour and articulate ability to express the views.
If only Tory politicians were imbued with similar bravery, they would corner the majority of voters in an instant.
The woke are petrified of Clarkson: the Tories should have put him in The Upper House ages ago, and I venture to suggest that were he ever to stand for election as an MP, anywhere in Britain, his opposition would all lose their deposits…
Well said!
If true why might Amazon, ITV opt to not renew? Profit maximisation driver ought to mean they have good grasp of audience preferences and how to attract advertising? If he represents a majority then they renew surely?
Or perhaps they know something the article suggests – tastes are changing?
Because they’re woke.
Clarkson farm is one of their most popular shows ever, but since video streaming is just a tiny proportion of their profits and they are a US megacorp they are expected to be as wokie as possible. They will drop Clarkson but cynically only after they raked it in with the second season.
I will in turn drop my amazon subscription.
A one word answer. Gillette
Because they’re woke.
Clarkson farm is one of their most popular shows ever, but since video streaming is just a tiny proportion of their profits and they are a US megacorp they are expected to be as wokie as possible. They will drop Clarkson but cynically only after they raked it in with the second season.
I will in turn drop my amazon subscription.
A one word answer. Gillette
Well said!
If true why might Amazon, ITV opt to not renew? Profit maximisation driver ought to mean they have good grasp of audience preferences and how to attract advertising? If he represents a majority then they renew surely?
Or perhaps they know something the article suggests – tastes are changing?
Classic blinkered, leftist lower middle class, chippy woke gospel: The truth is the diametric opposite to what this piece says.
Clarkson is one of the very few public figures who actually reflects and represents the now stifled, fear ridden, ” cancelled” views of the majority of Britons, not least at both ” horseshoe” ends of the socio demograph, but more significantly has the guts, courage, backbone and wry cynical humour and articulate ability to express the views.
If only Tory politicians were imbued with similar bravery, they would corner the majority of voters in an instant.
The woke are petrified of Clarkson: the Tories should have put him in The Upper House ages ago, and I venture to suggest that were he ever to stand for election as an MP, anywhere in Britain, his opposition would all lose their deposits…
I predict he will be back on TV within six months. H&M are total wrong’uns and Clarkson is one of the most talented entertainers in the world. This episode is a bit of nonsense that will blow over not a cultural turning point. In fact if anything I suspect it is wokery, not laddish high-jinx that has had its day.
Hope you are right!
He’ll be on GB News alongside the rest of the ‘has-beens’ imminently. Then all the sado’s can rage together and feel better.
Hope you are not!
He’ll be on GB News alongside the rest of the ‘has-beens’ imminently. Then all the sado’s can rage together and feel better.
Hope you are not!
The mainstream is purging itself of cross-over figures like Clarkson – and in so doing hastening its own demise. A polarizing figure, but undeniably one of the best entertainers of our age. The BBC and now Amazon bow to woke orthodoxy, they become less entertaining and more and more unwatchable. Watch for Clarkson to align with Ben Shapiro or someone like that to produce edgy ‘unwoke’ content. Nature abhors a vacuum and people will still pay to be entertained.
Hope you are right!
The mainstream is purging itself of cross-over figures like Clarkson – and in so doing hastening its own demise. A polarizing figure, but undeniably one of the best entertainers of our age. The BBC and now Amazon bow to woke orthodoxy, they become less entertaining and more and more unwatchable. Watch for Clarkson to align with Ben Shapiro or someone like that to produce edgy ‘unwoke’ content. Nature abhors a vacuum and people will still pay to be entertained.
I predict he will be back on TV within six months. H&M are total wrong’uns and Clarkson is one of the most talented entertainers in the world. This episode is a bit of nonsense that will blow over not a cultural turning point. In fact if anything I suspect it is wokery, not laddish high-jinx that has had its day.
I wouldn’t make this into a ponderance on the English national character…or even the British character for that matter. Clarkson and his brand have had massive global appeal. The biggest Clarkson fan in our house is my partner, who is from Luxembourg and who is still splitting his sides about J’s antics long after I’m rolling my eyes!
I thought the column was unacceptable…but as far as I can see it’s six of one and half a dozen of the other. Clarkson has – once again – gone too far and got himself into hot water: I have little sympathy for him and think he owed an apology. If someone said that about me, I’d loudly demand one too!
But on the other hand, we have the joyless, perma-bitter Sussexes who probably can’t even accept a pedestrian joke if it can possibly be interpreted as racism, sexism, misogyny, whatever and are themselves on a hate-fuelled crusade to completely destroy Jezzer…while of course calling themselves humanitarians and social justice warriors – which is the real joke here, if anyone wants to see it.
They really had the chance to be the bigger people here, show a bit of grace and accept the apology. As it is, they are simply lending further credence to those bullying claims from inside Buckingham Palace and making the public think that the RF shouldn’t offer any apology if this is where it gets them.
If I was offered a day with Clarkson or a day with the Sussexes, I’d be straight over to Clarkson’s place. It’d be funny, irreverent, probably politically incorrect and an enormous laugh…the Sussexes I imagine would be preachy, self-righteous, humourless, bitter and insanely dull. Some people in my circle went a bit that way and spending time with them became such a bore and a drag, I just stepped away.
Excellent post, Katharine! So well articulated that I need add no observations of my own. Thank you!
Bloody well said Katharine!..
Hey, Unherd, won’t you give Katharine her own column? Pretty please…
Sounds like a good idea.
Sounds like a good idea.
Excellent post, Katharine! So well articulated that I need add no observations of my own. Thank you!
Bloody well said Katharine!..
Hey, Unherd, won’t you give Katharine her own column? Pretty please…
I wouldn’t make this into a ponderance on the English national character…or even the British character for that matter. Clarkson and his brand have had massive global appeal. The biggest Clarkson fan in our house is my partner, who is from Luxembourg and who is still splitting his sides about J’s antics long after I’m rolling my eyes!
I thought the column was unacceptable…but as far as I can see it’s six of one and half a dozen of the other. Clarkson has – once again – gone too far and got himself into hot water: I have little sympathy for him and think he owed an apology. If someone said that about me, I’d loudly demand one too!
But on the other hand, we have the joyless, perma-bitter Sussexes who probably can’t even accept a pedestrian joke if it can possibly be interpreted as racism, sexism, misogyny, whatever and are themselves on a hate-fuelled crusade to completely destroy Jezzer…while of course calling themselves humanitarians and social justice warriors – which is the real joke here, if anyone wants to see it.
They really had the chance to be the bigger people here, show a bit of grace and accept the apology. As it is, they are simply lending further credence to those bullying claims from inside Buckingham Palace and making the public think that the RF shouldn’t offer any apology if this is where it gets them.
If I was offered a day with Clarkson or a day with the Sussexes, I’d be straight over to Clarkson’s place. It’d be funny, irreverent, probably politically incorrect and an enormous laugh…the Sussexes I imagine would be preachy, self-righteous, humourless, bitter and insanely dull. Some people in my circle went a bit that way and spending time with them became such a bore and a drag, I just stepped away.
He shouldn’t have apologised. Like pricking your finger in shark-infested water.
Cause for all us non-famous people to be grateful we’ll never face the seductions of a camera and an audience.
Well, Clarkson has definitely done the RF a big favour in demonstrating where an apology will get you with the Sussexes…into an even bigger puddle of whinge and woe is me and it’s all your fault.
I don’t think I’ve ever come across two people so determined to be unhappy and bitter. I pity them. Who’d want to be around people like this? Not I.
I pity their children.
Time to call social services I think
I pity their children.
Time to call social services I think
Well, Clarkson has definitely done the RF a big favour in demonstrating where an apology will get you with the Sussexes…into an even bigger puddle of whinge and woe is me and it’s all your fault.
I don’t think I’ve ever come across two people so determined to be unhappy and bitter. I pity them. Who’d want to be around people like this? Not I.
He shouldn’t have apologised. Like pricking your finger in shark-infested water.
Cause for all us non-famous people to be grateful we’ll never face the seductions of a camera and an audience.
So Clarkson is “ … responsible for Brexit” and an “ ethical criminal” – two phrases which show the author’s true colours . Just another episode of “Carry on Wokely Remoaning” dressed up as a supposedly intellectual insight.
Ironically, Clarkson is a Remainer!