NationStates Jolt Archive

In case any of you are unaware or are not familiar with this story I shall recap. Boris Johnson is Conservative MP for Henley-on-Thames. He is also however the Editor of the political journal/magazine 'The Spectator' and was recently criticised for an article in which it was said that the city of Liverpool was "wallowing in disproportionate grief" over executed British hostage Ken Bigley.

Now I am not going to support Boris' clearly slightly clumsy timing for this article (which he didn't write but allowed to be published). Less than a week after news of the man's death was blatantly too soon to release such an article.
It was also wrong to single out Liverpool as a city in this editorial.

However does anyone else feel that most of the article was actually right? This is not just because I find Boris Johnson to be a completely affable character (quite a change for an M.P) but because the general point of the article in question I have a lot of symnpathy for.

We British, in the the last few years have grown very, very superficial in our grief. This is best highlighted by the reaction after the death of Princess Diana. Now I am not going to get into an argument about Diana. Clearly she was a woman who endured some terrible setbacks especially within her family life. She was also I am sure tremendously kind and did improve people's outlook on life through her good works. But the way in which the people of this country reacted after her death was absolutely absurd. People who had never met her, were sat outside her house for days on end or were crying at her funeral procession.

Compare that to the mood at the funeral of former President Reagan in America recently. Again, I am not going to debate the ups and downs of President Reagan, but at the funeral procession I never saw anyone (except his long-time spouse) crying. And yet there were thousands of people lining the streets of Washington D.C. This is because in America they reacted as a country should to the death of a former democratic leader of such importance as Reagan (far more than Princess Di). Many at the funeral revealed that they rarely agreed with his policies and yet they turned up to say goodbye to a man who had served his country and who was a respected and affable figure even if they disliked his politics.

And when you look at events like the death of Ken Bigley or the Soham murders, we British do get far too worked up for no reason about such events. These events, do not get me wrong, were shocking and I completely sympathised with the families of both the two murdered schoolgirls and of Mr Bigley. But for there to be massive services in their honour in Ely and Liverpool after the respective tragedies once again shows the absurdity of the modern British mentality.
People who never even knew Mr Bigley or Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman turned up and wept at a press dominated event at what should have been a time for the family's private grief.
Also, for people to be mourning for Ken Bigley (a man who went over there of his own free will and who was very well-paid) while other British, American, Iraqi and people of other nationalities are dying in Iraq every day, is actually very insulting to the families of those killed in Iraq and yet whose deaths have gained very little media attention.

I am prepared to get a lot of bother and probably abuse for this post, but I am merely saying what I think to be true which is that although the article should maybe not have said what it said when it said it and certainly should not have just spoken about Liverpool and Mr Bigley, I think that its general point about this absurd mentality of the British towards news of high-profile death was right. I also think that this mentality is quite dangerous as it is making us insincere and superficial because we are mourning and grieving for people who had little influence on our lives. The 'stiff upper-lip' had its faults but it was better than this artificial, politically correct vice that has replaced it!

Sympathise with people, by all means, you're a bastard if you don't. But please do not go over the top to news headlines.

Yes we are. Well I'm not, but some people are.

For a fat tory, Boris is a stand-up bloke and I'd vote for him. Unlike Cromwell, who was a bastard. ;)

He was responsible for something fairly sensible being printed in his small circulation magazine, and loony Howard being a populist wanker made him go and apologise to all the mousers as a whole, most of whom couldn't begin to imagine where he was coming from.

Yes we are. Well I'm not, but some people are.

For a fat tory, Boris is a stand-up bloke and I'd vote for him. Unlike Cromwell, who was a bastard. ;)

He was responsible for something fairly sensible being printed in his small circulation magazine, and loony Howard being a populist wanker made him go and apologise to all the mousers as a whole, most of whom couldn't begin to imagine where he was coming from.

I'd vote for Boris anyday. He may act the fool sometimes but is (by all accounts) a nice guy and actually has principles. Boris clearly did not want to apologise and Michael Howard forcing him has done the Conservative party no good at all.

Please do not insult Scousers though as my Mother is one and she has never stolen a thing in her life and is one of the most articulate women one could hope to meet (although I would say that).

Don't get me started on Cromwell again! ;)

Anyone else got an opinion?

Aye, good for Boris. Nice guy, printed something perhaps a bit tasteless but nonetheless accurate. we are turning into sentimentalists just far too easily.

Aye, good for Boris. Nice guy, printed something perhaps a bit tasteless but nonetheless accurate. we are turning into sentimentalists just far too easily.

Exactly my point. Is it just me or is Boris Johnson destined to lead his party?

I'd sooner punch the arsehole in the face than look at him. This is coming from a pacifist.

(Not a reaction to his comments about Bigley.)

But, I say yes. The public are over-reacting. They only reason that so many pretend to care so much is because it was heavily publicised.

The real reason this has provoked such a strong reaction from the right is slightly more than they're admiting. There is a strong anti-war sentiment to it and telling them they should "act more English, stiff upper lip and all that" is based on a fear that they will follow their "disproportionate grief" with grassroots organisation against the establishment. There is no real alternative in UK politics - Labour, Conservative, LibDem - there's more commonality between their policies than difference. The UKIP and Respect? Don't make me laugh. Grassroots activism, when it catches the public imagination, can make a difference - the last thing anyone in the establishment wants to see is the anti-war movement, the largest ever in the history of political action in the UK, to truly cross over into the public, out of the hands of the reliably inept authoritarian left and into the hands of the people. The poll tax campaign succeeded not just because of its size, but because of its broad base and lack of centralised control by any party. Nobody in the establishment wants anything like that to happen again - the rule is that you play by the rules, vote for whoever or just don't vote at all, but don't try to change the system in any other way - "Look at how we treated the Mayday protests for three years running, that could be YOU."

I'm not from the U.K., but I agree with you. Too much drama over something that really isn't important in the scheme of things. Which isn't to say that his death isn't sad, or that a lot of people in his hometown shouldn't be grieving, but England as a whole in grief? Give me a break.

I'm in two minds about Boris Johnson, on one hand is on the nicer part of the Tory party, but I cannot help but feel he is an amazingly pretentious twat.

However, I do agree that the British do tend to show disproportionate grief (personally, I was not moved by the death of Bigly or Princess Di). I also agree that part of the reason is that people thought they should be like that.

As a side note, aparently Bigly commiseration book has been nicked (but I have not been able to confirm this, so apologies if wrong). No bad feeling towards scousers though, just a bit ironic. I'm currently live in Liverpool, and love it.

I'm in two minds about Boris Johnson, on one hand is on the nicer part of the Tory party, but I cannot help but feel he is an amazingly pretentious twat.


I dare you to have a conversation with him about anything without wanting to repeatedly punch him the face. Maybe he just has one of those faces that is very punchable - but he's still a twat.

Top man up there with Tony Ben. Says what he means and means what he says. Now Two faced Tony, there's a man I could introduce briefly and repeatedly to a bit of three by two.

Not all of England is in greif. Yes it was a horrific death. But i've never met the bloke, and can't seem why people that don't know the man are greiving?

No disrespect, but c'mon people, wake up!

Mmm. Poll's pretty one sided.

The question in the thread and the question for the poll are two completely different questions.

Yes, Boris got a bit more stick than he deserved, but no, I don't think the mourning was particularly over the top.

I don't like Boris Johnson (personal feelings) and I wouldn't vote for him. I also feel the timing and the singling out of Liverpool in the article was a mistake. It was also very poorly written and, if I had been editor, would have been heavily revised. The fact that the leader of the Conservative Party then forced him to make a completly unfelt apology to the people of Liverpool was hilarious though, something both Labour and Lib-Dem spindoctors would be foolish not to act on!
All that said however, the point the article made was a good one. Since the death of Diana we've become so over-the-top in media hyped grief that its almost laughable. The tradgedy that was Ken Bigleys death has now been overshadowed by the false outpouring of emotion, and though one can sympathise with his family I won't lose any sleep over it (harsh perhaps, but how many of those people who were seen crying over his death really felt any real emotion?)

This isn't a problem that only the British have.
Everywhere you go, there is bound to be an incident which, for one reason or another, moves the ignorant masses to outwardly display fake and exaggerated grief.
I can't claim to know or even comprehend what goes through the average person's head when they sob over someone who dies, while ignoring the other 154,483 or so that have died that day [saltmonument.org], but I'm sure it has to do with a media induced reaction.
Even when I did watch 5 hours of TV a day, I was never really susceptible to advertising et al.

Another thing to note, though, is that there is a difference between dying and being killed. Not much in the grand scheme of things, but subjectively humans make a sharp distinction between the two. Still, many people are killed each day, something easily upward than 10,000 (I couldn't find any exact statistic).

The bottom line is, you can't cry for everyone, a lesson I learned when I was 7. It's time the "average" person learn that too.

A sharp rebuke is better than none, even if ill concieved and ill timed.

Hey there,

I am from the United States so I am not familiar with this person or situation. But I know what you said about Princess Diana and Reagan. I cried when both died... I cried for Diana because I saw how far she had come as a person and all the good things she did do. I mainly cried for her boys as they would never have the love of their mother again. I cried for Reagan as it was a loss of a president. I cried for Nancy because it amazed me how she was his main caretaker through the whole thing.

I agree with you that many people take the grieving over board. I for one am not a Nascar fan but many are and I am not trying to poo poo on Nascar but when Dale Earnhardt was killed, I cried. Not because he was a good Nascar driver but because it showed his family loved him dearly as a person and I cried for them. But I didn't mourn for days and I didn't understand how many cities wanted to change the names of streets and bridges in his honor. He was a great man, who loved what he did but he died at his job of choice. I see children dying every day but I don't see people mourning for days over our that.

Again not getting down on Nascar people....

OK, I too am an ignorant American who has never heard of this guy before this post, but here's my two cents. Grief can easily cross the line into an ostentatious display completely removed from the actual cause for grief. To address your analogy of Reagan's death, I disagree that it was appropriate - grief over his death is used as a political tool all the time - everyone had to release a statement about how they were sorry he died and how much they respected him, even though they probably never did when he was alive - everyone had to jump on the "boo hoo Reagan's dead, look how much I supported him" bandwagon because it looked good for them - Reagan's son spoke at the DNC, much more high profile than if his dad'd still been alive (you can't even be sure he would have done that had he not died)... I mean, it's not limited to Brits, and you shouldn't be holding up Americans as an example of good - we're not.

...the city of Liverpool was "wallowing in disproportionate grief" over executed British hostage Ken Bigley.

...we British do get far too worked up for no reason about such events. These events, do not get me wrong, were shocking and I completely sympathised with the families of both the two murdered schoolgirls and of Mr Bigley. But for there to be massive services in their honour in Ely and Liverpool after the respective tragedies once again shows the absurdity of the modern British mentality.
People who never even knew Mr Bigley or Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman turned up and wept at a press dominated event at what should have been a time for the family's private grief.
Also, for people to be mourning for Ken Bigley (a man who went over there of his own free will and who was very well-paid) while other British, American, Iraqi and people of other nationalities are dying in Iraq every day, is actually very insulting to the families of those killed in Iraq and yet whose deaths have gained very little media attention.
I disagree here. You're not being "worked up for no reason", and it isn't inappropriate to mourn someone you've never met. I never knew any of the American hostages killed in Iraq, but I sure as hell feel awful for them and mourn them, very sincerely. Because if it happened to him, it could happen to anyone - yes, he went over there of his own free will, but he was a citizen. It could have been anyone. It's the idea behind the death, the idea that it's irrational and unfair and highly subjective, the idea that there is such chaos in the world that something like this happens to innocent people. I know some people (ala the press) intrude onto the family's grief, but it is appropriate for the entire world to mourn the dead, imo.

As for the point that other deaths should be equally mourned, it's a good one. We should be giving a lot more attention to military and Iraqi civilian causualties than we currently do - but that does not in any way demean, lessen, or make umseemly the grief over these executed people.

Ahh, Boris. He's supplied me with several fine moments in my long-time viewing of 'Have I Got News for You'. ;) I'm not sure I'd like the guy personally, but from a distance I easily find him to be the most acceptable member of the Conservative Party. If you want annoying, meet Anne Widdecombe. Ten seconds of her talking and I had to leave the room.

I always thought the 'grief' for Diana was ridiculous. People who didn't care at all when living suddenly cried a river at her funeral. People took days off work because they were 'grieving' too much. And think of all the money made with Princess Diana Memorabilia?

I did feel sorry about what happened to Bigley. I only heard when I was cooking dinner, talking to my flatmates, and one of them came in to mention they'd heard it on the radio. There was a bit of a silence, we were all pretty bummed by the news, clearly it wasn't a pleasant thing and I think a part of it was that it was the end of some hope that one of these Iraqi catastrophe stories might have a happy ending - turned out that wasn't meant to be.

But you know what happened after my flatmates and I exchanged a few 'oh's and some 'That sucks' sentiments? We went back to cooking dinner and it hasn't cropped up since. Bear in mind that this is a bunch of students, many of whom study politics, so we do discuss Iraq and such matters on a fairly regular basis, so it's not just that all we talk about is food and beer. ;) Just to contextualise my perspective of Bigley and grief.

Thanks for your views guys. And for voting.