We know that Victoria Wood used to complain about essentially this, that as
a woman she felt outnumbered in panel games. She talked about the hostility
she felt from being the sole woman surrounded by testosterone-fuelled male
panelists.
I do not believe Victoria was thinking of 'Just A Minute' specifically.
Wendy Richard, however, is the classic example of a female guest who didn't
cope well with it. I would reconsider, if I believed that the team could be
balanced by 2 women against 2 men, but it is hard enough to think of even
one female player who could fill a permanent slot.
I did seriously consider Sheila Hancock as a permanent member, and if she
was a bit younger I would have suggested her. But if we are looking for
players who might remain with the show for many years to come, we ought not
to look to panellists who are much older than Paul.
Are you going to suggest Sue Perky? I personally don't think she is right
for it -- too strident. I do think Julian Clary is a better choice, because
of his amiable personality.
If I thought for a moment that he would do it, I would suggest Barry Cryer
as the 4th man. I don't suppose he would want to. My other serious
suggestion for the putative 4th slot would be Andy Hamilton, because of his
versatility.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark
sirnylon@... [just-a-minute]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 4:08 AM
To:
just-a-minute@...
Subject: Re: [just-a-minute] blog posts
'I do not think that I could come up with an obvious fourth choice. But it
ought to be a man. Having a female panellist would unbalance the team,
because she would be in a permanent minority'
That's an interesting way to start a fight! ð
Demelza - care to step in?
I can see many women capable of restraining their exploding uteruses long
enough to be formidable competitors.
Let's start with S01E02 and Sheila Hancock who can still give the men a
hearty verbal spanking 52 years later.
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 11:07, Clitheroe Kid
clitheroekid@...
[just-a-minute] <
just-a-minute@...> wrote:
This idea came from me, so I feel sort of compelled to reply.
I would quite like to see Gyles Brandreth alongside Paul Merton, as the core
of a new team. Paul is I think universally popular, and Gyles has some of
the virtues of the original foursome, in terms of his intellectual abilitity
to talk on many subjects (he also fulfills Clement's role as a Member of
Parliament). Paul of course fulfills the need to have someone from show
business on the team (the role which Derek Nimmo, Peter Jones and Kenny
Williams had in common).
Julian Clary fulfills somewhat of the 'gay blade' role which Kenny Williams
had. I would not object to him as a permanent fixture. He has the outrageous
element which Kenny provided. But he also has the same unthreatening
personality that Kenny had.
I do not think that I could come up with an obvious fourth choice. But it
ought to be a man. Having a female panellist would unbalance the team,
because she would be in a permanent minority -- the situation which led
Wendy Richard to become defensive and hostile. And which allegedly caused
Nyree Dawn-Porter to break down in tears and flee the studio.
(I have to repeat a previous comment I made: I actually knew Wendy slightly,
I had met her in private life, and she was not at all like she came across
in the show. She was much more relaxed "off", and really very nice. I think
she was not intellectually equipped to play the game like Derek, Clement and
Kenneth did, and she was aware of it, and she over-compensated.)
You would not need to have all 4 regulars in the show every week, but it
would be understood that there was a regular quartet around whom guests
could be featured.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark
sirnylon@... [just-a-minute]
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2019 3:04 AM
To:
just-a-minute@...
Subject: Re: [just-a-minute] blog posts
The peril of having a regular panel is that if you just can't stand one of
the regulars, it sours the entire show and may make listeners tune out.
For me, Derek Nimmo always rubbed me up the wrong way with his infantile
babblings. And don't get me started on Wendy Richard!
But I like hearing from Julian Clary, who might really annoy other people.
Choosing a new 'gang of four' for the next decade would be difficult indeed.
On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 at 11:31, Clitheroe Kid
clitheroekid@...
[just-a-minute] <
just-a-minute@...> wrote:
Thought I ought in fairness to point out that -
a. In the beginning, *all* the shows were recorded at the BBC's Paris studio
in Lower Regent Street. There was no touring whatsoever during the first 25
years. Yet the show was wildly popular. Its success had nothing to do with
holding recordings outside London, clearly, because no recordings were done
outside London in those days.
b. Kenneth's death is what changed the show.
When Paul replaced him, it more or less went on with 4 new regulars, and was
a very similar show, i.e. one which was still based on the regulars -- until
Derek and Peter both passed away in close proximity, at the turn of the
century.
Yes, it has lost something by having 4 different players every week. There
is no sense of continuity now. Except Nicholas.
It would certainly benefit from emulating 'Clue', i.e. having the same
panellists all the time. But there are no modern players who can do it as
well as the old team. Paul can, but who would you want to have on the show
with him every week? Suggestions on a postcard please!
-----Original Message-----
From:
george@... [just-a-minute]
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2019 10:10 AM
To:
just-a-minute@...
Subject: [just-a-minute] Re: blog posts
> I don't think it's the reduction of shine from Clement,
> I think it's the lack of the camaraderie that the original
> 4 plus Nicholas had. In modern times, they've stopped
> touring (reducing the national interest instantly)
> and also, Paul is the main regular. It's become a
> different show than the four you had. Even when you
> had guests you at least had two regulars. The
> "feeling" totally changes when you get all the additional guests.