I see Clarkson's getting a bit more publicity...

[brokenflipflop]

I've read a few of Clarksons books and I enjoyed them. I quite like the fact he comes out with outrageous comments for whatever reason. I think it provokes debate and rattles a few cages and touches a few nerves and winds a few do gooders up. I'm not an uber intelligent Guardian-reading super-educated arty-farty type so I'm prepared to accept most people don't share my view but just like Clarkson, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

 

[swee'pea99]

The contortions of the Clarkson-haters never fail to amaze and amuse. Only those with an engrained agenda could fail to recognise, whatever your personal opinions of the man, a genuine talent for the written word, with an engaging and amusing way of expressing clearly thought through ideas. Above, for example, that Japanese cars' lack of character reflects their genesis: creation by companies of committees - good for consistency and reliability, not so good for distinctiveness.

Where's the clunky? What's the throwaway? There's a very clear line of thought. And I'm buggered if I can see any opinions masquerading as facts. Not that I expect any of this to sway anyone one way or t'other.

Clarkson's political views could hardly be further removed from mine, and he strikes me as (unlike James May) a chap no sane man would want at his dinner table. But to call him talentless strikes me as witless. He's a very good writer, a very good presenter, and a very shrewd judge of what does and doesn't sell. If that's talentless, I say again, sign me up for some.

 

[dellzeqq]

He may be opinionated and likes to wind people up (people who are stupid enough to allow themselves to be wound up) but I definitely wouldn't call him a shoot writer. I've read a few of his books and enjoyed them. The sales figures suggest others do too.

Have you actually read any of his books to come to this conclusion or are you just putting down someone who's world view doesn't match your own?

I read the bit above, and the stuff on the blurbs. And he's a shoot writer.

Now I've read lots of writers that I disagree with, and found myself charmed or moved or just impressed. Paul McMullan, to name but one, is a tabloid writer who really can grab the reader and pull him or her in to a story - that's why the NoW employed him, and that's why he did so brilliantly well at the Leveson Inquiry. He said that he was proud to have started a riot in which a paediatrician was beaten up. Clarkson can barely put a paragraph together, let alone start a riot - his stuff is just a string of disconnected sentences without any poetry or allusion or engagement. It's graffiti in small type.

 

[Silver Fox]

JC has clearly missed the memo about latest fashionable commandment : Though shall not offend anyone at any time.

 

[swee'pea99]

No he isn't. Yes he can. No it isn't.

Ner ner ne ner ner.

And that's my last word on the subject.

 

[brokenflipflop]

Worlds best quotes: I'm proud to have started a riot in which a paediatrician was beaten up" Paul McMullan.

Brilliant! Any links to some more of this profound poetry. I've gone right off Clarkson now.

 

[User482]

The contortions of the Clarkson-haters never fail to amaze and amuse. Only those with an engrained agenda could fail to recognise, whatever your personal opinions of the man, a genuine talent for the written word, with an engaging and amusing way of expressing clearly thought through ideas. Above, for example, that Japanese cars' lack of character reflects their genesis: creation by companies of committees - good for consistency and reliability, not so good for distinctiveness.

Where's the clunky? What's the throwaway? There's a very clear line of thought. And I'm buggered if I can see any opinions masquerading as facts. Not that I expect any of this to sway anyone one way or t'other.

Clarkson's political views could hardly be further removed from mine, and he strikes me as (unlike James May) a chap no sane man would want at his dinner table. But to call him talentless strikes me as witless. He's a very good writer, a very good presenter, and a very shrewd judge of what does and doesn't sell. If that's talentless, I say again, sign me up for some.

We must be reading different articles. The one I read was a highly unoriginal mish mash of confusion, lacking clarity and insight, and a conclusion that doesn't stand up to more than a moment's scrutiny.

He is of course a good judge of what sells. That doesn't make him a good writer.

 

[brokenflipflop]

So in short...rather entertaining. I suppose if you're really intellectual, read the Guardian and think deeply 24 hours a day then I'd imagine it's not very entertaining. Obviously JC has done his sums and worked out that the 2% of tefal heads that pull his musings to bits and analyse his every flippant remark and quote to death aren't his target audience.

 

[Mr Phoebus]

Blimey, over 21,000 complaints.

Does that already beat Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand?

 

[User482]

I suppose if you are moderately intelligent, have read a book, and think for more than a minute a day really intellectual, read the Guardian and think deeply 24 hours a day then I'd imagine it's not very entertaining.

FTFY.

 

[snorri]

but the train one? he was just complaining that the trains are delays disproportionately all becuase some selfish twat decided to jump in front of a train.

It wouldn't worry you a little if it came to light a year later that the "twat" may have been pushed rather than had jumped of his own free will? A bit late to start looking for evidence a year after the event.

 

[Globalti]

I don't particularly LIKE the bloke, he is a buffoon and he represents the boorish chauvinistic element of the male sex. However I do think he voiced the opinions of a large number of private-sector workers and the reaction from the whining unions and others desperate to prove their PC credentials was as bad as the bullying that goes on in this forum sometimes when the PC element read things they don't like. We live in a democracy that values freedom of speech.

 

[ushills]

Having listened to the numpty on Radio 4 describe Clarkson's comment as being on a par with Gadaffi I remain convinced that they are some plainly stupid people on this earth who must spend their entire life being miserable.

Most people do not realise how fortunate they are in today's society and if you were to go back a couple of hundred years or move to a less developed country would probably indeed find yourself shot for strking or protesting in public.

For my comment, and working in the private sector, those public sector employees who dislike the way they are renumerated should do what we have to do in the private sector and move bl**dy jobs. However, private sector employers know that there are no jobs out there so can continue to squeeze everyone harder and the government is just doing the same.

Be grateful you have a job to begin with and move on when things get better, moaning rarely get one anywhere.

 

[Globalti]

HERE HERE! chunter chunter well said old boy, damn right, etc etc.

In many of the countries I visit on business you don't get a job unless you: A) are related to somebody in the company, B) bribe somebody or C) sleep with the boss. Even then you have no job security and if you do lose the job, no social security. There are no pension arrangements supported by generous employers and no sick pay. To reach 45 without suffering some kind of stress-related illness is considered extremely good and puts you in the league of venerable oldies.

*more chuntering, fading away in direction of nearest pub*

 

[dellzeqq]

JC has clearly missed the memo about latest fashionable commandment : Though shall not offend anyone at any time.

you see, that's where you simply slip in to the same tired old refrain. Causing offence can be fun. It's the most fun when the person is you're offending is being taken down a peg or two, but, notwithstanding, causing offence with wit or grace is often highly entertaining, whoever the target. The highways engineer who, having checked out his audience, said to me 'the worst cyclists are the Jewish ones - when they get squashed you have to make sure every last bit goes in to the same bag' was being offensive, but being funny at the same time - I, his intended target, laughed out loud.

Clarkson has no wit, and no grace. He's just crude. He's just a knuckledragger who taps in to crudity and cruelty.