Christis


	Contents page \| Christis archive \| Submissions \| Advertising \| Links page \| Meet the team \| Cartoons \| Subscribe \| Christis timetable \| Search Christis

Big
Brother

Some implications?

The word ‘cult’ is perhaps too hastily brandished in reference to certain movements, individuals and indeed voyeur television programmes. In the case of the sensation that was Channel Four’s Big Brother it lacks sufficient precision due to the fact that a cult generally appeals to a narrow and specific group in society. Big Brother was watched by a colossal audience and was not confined to any specific social section. To label it a ‘religion’ would appear somewhat ostentatious, especially in a Christian magazine, but in light of its enduring ability to generate and maintain popular interest, it would, although ironically, seem the most appropriate term to use. To regard it as such allows us certain insights into modern-day British society.

It is likely that Umberto Eco would have included Big Brother in his postmodernist essay A Guide to the Neo- Television of the 1980’s as a further example of how television has become so absorbed in itself that it has virtually abandoned the external world. It was the fact that every action of the ten contestants was captured on camera that made Big Brother so remarkable. This was an example of television making history and arguably, Big Brother was a completely unprecedented phenomenon in Britain. However, it was not only the uniqueness of this strange docu-soap that made it so popular, and in fact viewing figures in the first week of it being broadcast were relatively unimpressive; it was the potential it had for producing new popular icons, a task in which it succeeded admirably.

There is nothing inherently wrong with creating popular icons per se but they should be positive figures who exhibit qualities that others can aspire to duplicate. This is the same notion that the church has embraced in promoting saints and saintly traits. However, there was little that was saintly about the antics of Nick Bateman and we are faced with the reality that we live in a society that fabricates a cult of personality around someone who is unashamedly deceitful, lying and manipulative. He proudly boasts that only Diana Princess of Wales has had more written about her in the press and although whether or not this is a realistic assertion is open to debate, it is certainly likely that he has capitalised on his infamy with more success than his fellow contestants (or should that be opponents?) have capitalised on their fame. Nasty Nick’s video, book and quiz series all pay tribute to his ostensibly Machiavellian nature and the fact that he has all too often been cited as the real winner of the show has some serious implications for the type of society we are evolving into especially considering the number of people who seem able to empathise with him.

The programme offered other issues for contemplation. For example, it is interesting that the most outwardly spiritual of the contestants (Sada) was the first to be removed from the house and surprising that family man Darren was voted out before lesbian- singing-nun Anna, a fact which serves to suggest that society has become far less preoccupied with sexuality than either St Paul or Baroness Young may have hoped.

Big Brother may demonstrate how (unhealthily?) fascinated we are in the lives of others and their interaction with one another and it may worry us with the ease with which unpleasantness can be so rewarding for an individual but it does also offer us some hope for the future.

There was little room for cynicism when the victor (Craig) emerged from the house triumphant and exultant, gleefully pledging to donate all his prize-money to the cause of attaining for his friend's sister Joanne, a life-saving heart and lung transplant (necessary only because of the arbitrary attitude retained by the health authorities in Britain in regards to people with Down’s Syndrome). The media interest in this story can only be described as immensely positive. It was marvellous to witness such an incredible contrast between the cold insensitivity of the cheat with the benevolence and sincerity of the winner.

Ultimately it is probably unnecessary to analyse Big Brother very much and it is doubtful that it has bequeathed many useful insights into our world any more than programmes such as Airport or Castaway 2000. It was unique (and will remain so at least until the new series begins) and has shown how a nation can become obsessed with ten or eleven fairly dull and sometimes quite strange individuals. It has also given a shining example, in the middle of an appalling year shrouded in national and international disasters, of good triumphing over evil. A naive statement perhaps, but at least the sentiment is right.

Carey J Chambers

Last modified: 25th November 2005