Recently, I've taken to watching pigs.
In the 80s, my Dad bought me a video of the Pinky and Perky show, wanting to relive his childhood days of Muffin the Mule and Andy Pandy with me as his excuse, but I was unimpressed; black and white pigs just didn't do it for me.
So I was perplexed to find myself on YouTube last week hunting for clips of those very same high-pitched pigs. I found an episode, 'Where There's Life, There's Soap', and revelled in the 1960s weirdness of a mouse shaving some coconuts, a squirrel in a sequined evening gown, and the eponymous pigs enjoying powdered soup with Michael Aspel. But that one episode wasn't enough. I was soon online buying a VHS tape of their porcine japes, despite having no video recorder to play the thing on.
So why all this fuss? At the age of 33, and relatively well-educated, why am I suddenly keen to watch children's TV? For the same reason my Dad was making me watch it in the 80s: simple nostalgia. Watching the pigs clunk their heads together and giggle, then drive their tiny wobbling car through the streets of Central London is soothing. I can say 'ahhh, look how nice and simple it was then. Wee pigs in sailor suits! Not like your modern stuff. Cartoons are all about violence these days' - saying it even though I've not watched children's TV since Terrahawks was on.
So, as soon as I find a video player at the Barras, I'll be reliving my childhood, happy as a pig in schmaltz. Yet, if you showed me a current children's show about puppets I wouldn't be interested. It's the nostalgia I'm after. I want that connection to something long since gone.
And maybe that's what'll happen with Boomers (BBC1). Perhaps, years later, I'll come to appreciate it because I think this sitcom needs nostalgia to make it lovable.
Nostalgia is central to the show, being concerned with the Baby Boomer generation who're now facing age and death and reassessing their lives. The famous cast would alone lend it a nostalgic quality: Alison Steadman, Russ Abbot, Nigel Planer, Stephanie Beecham etc.
Set in damp, flat, windy Norfolk, the first episode was about death. The Baby Boomers are required to attend an increasing amount of funerals but, rather than being glum affairs, they're seen as a social event and a chance to catch up with old friends. Most of the comedy was drawn from the idea that funerals can be fun: the women get dolled up and the men look forward to a few drinks and a chance to assess what car so-and-so's driving these days.
Much time was given to the old dears fussing and tutting at their menfolk, or fretting about finding a parking space. To the credit of the actors, this was done far too well. They were utterly authentic but who wants to watch old women nag?
Most of the comedy came from the men. Russ Abbot was good (I never thought I'd type such a sentence) playing John, a man who's tetchy and irritable at the arrival of the flash Mick (Nigel Planer). Mick moved to Spain and arrives at the funeral to boast of his villa and sun-kissed life, whilst trashing rainy Norfolk. To rub more salt in the wounds, he turns up with a gorgeous Lithuanian bride. But all is not as it seems with the swaggering Mick. His bride is at the bar revealing far too much to Trevor (James Smith) whilst he tries frantically to impress her with his knowledge of Lithuania: 'I think your chief exports are textiles and wood chip.'
Boomers is gentle and pleasant but not much else. Stephanie Beecham has compared it to Friends, but the only 'will they, won't they' tension here is will or won't the characters die. Boomers isn't about comedy, it's about nostalgia and harks back to the jolly, middle-class 80s sitcoms like Butterflies and Terry and June, but you can't import nostalgia. You can't instantly create it and install it in a sitcom. It is earned with time and distance. Boomers will just have to be patient and maybe we'll love it in 20 years.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article