First Jimmy Savile, now Rolf Harris. Sickening and disgusting.
In Pulp terms, I imagine the extended Countdown will be edited for any future releases, and we'll certainly never get to see Jarvis' appearance on Celebrity Stars In Their Eyes on our TV screens again...
Yep, he can be heard at the very end of the extended mix of Countdown - it's a sample from his 'Introduces the Revolutionary Stylophone' LP. Rolf was clearly a childhood hero for Jarvis.
Of course all this is pretty irrelevant in comparison to what's really important in this whole sad affair. At least the truth has come out and justice has been done.
A bloody shame, my mum used to sing '2 little boys' to me as an infant. And when Jarv did it on stars in their eyes it made me cry. its only the last year or so that i have been able to face watching his performance. And now this, Dirty bastard Rolf, you're a cunt for spoiling this once magic memory.
It's very sad. I've seen Rolf 3 times at Glastonbury and once at the South Bank centre. My sister is a huge fan. I must admit I fully expected him to be found innocent - especially with a lot of similar cases being not guilty (William Roache etc). But it turns out he did it so he deserves everything he gets and we must forget him and the memories.
__________________
If you didn't come to party then why did you come?
This reminds me of Mark's section from feelingcalledlive, when they were on Live & Kicking and Gary Glitter turned up as a guest. Totally unthinkable now.
Didn't Operation Yewtree investigate accusations against John Peel as well? I have a bad habit of skimming the Daily Mail on my lunch break and a few months ago there was a big kerfuffle about Peel's love-child with a teenage groupie.
You know, I can't listen to PTA anymore without thinking its a bit creepy and uncomfortable.
-- Edited by Fuss Free on Sunday 6th of July 2014 10:01:17 PM
Rolf Harris is a million miles away from Gary Glitter!!
The crimes that Rolf Harris committed were awful, and I'm glad he's been prosecuted for them. But, not being religious, I don't believe in concepts of good and evil. The horrible stuff that Rolf Harris did was horrible, and the great stuff that Rolf Harris did was great.
My immediate reaction to his conviction was "oh god, all my memories of loving Animal Hospital as a child have been ruined"- but they haven't at all; I loved that programmes because he was a warm, empathetic TV presenter who seemed to really care about the programme. He's still all of those things, he's just also been found guilty of some horrible sexual offences (not rape though- some people seem to be getting confused about that).
It's easy to feel betrayed when famous people you like are found guilty of crimes, but in my opinion the only people who have a right to feel betrayed are his friends and family, as they are the only ones who actually knew him. The rest of us only ever saw and liked his public persona. Also, I'm not implying that his public persona was a lovely family entertainer whereas in reality he was a sexual deviant; in his personal life he was as complex a human being as anyone else in the world- not inherently good or bad. Who knows why he committed those crimes, but logically they don't define his entire personality, life and career, except in the eyes of the media.
I wouldn't feel bad or guilty about owning a Stylophone box with his face on it, similarly I don't feel bad listening to Phil Spector records (and his crime was infinitely more abhorrent- and he was a well documented abuser too), and if John Peel was posthumously linked to allegations it wouldn't affect my view of his radio work, unless it was on a Saville-esque scale.
And while Gary Glitter obviously committed abhorrent crimes when living in Asia and is terrifyingly remorseless, thinking that the Glitter Band had some absolute tunes doesn't make you a bad person. Rock and Roll Part 2 is played at sport events all the time in America without the entire world imploding.
Rolf Harris is a million miles away from Gary Glitter!!
The crimes that Rolf Harris committed were awful, and I'm glad he's been prosecuted for them. But, not being religious, I don't believe in concepts of good and evil. The horrible stuff that Rolf Harris did was horrible, and the great stuff that Rolf Harris did was great.
My immediate reaction to his conviction was "oh god, all my memories of loving Animal Hospital as a child have been ruined"- but they haven't at all; I loved that programmes because he was a warm, empathetic TV presenter who seemed to really care about the programme. He's still all of those things, he's just also been found guilty of some horrible sexual offences (not rape though- some people seem to be getting confused about that).
It's easy to feel betrayed when famous people you like are found guilty of crimes, but in my opinion the only people who have a right to feel betrayed are his friends and family, as they are the only ones who actually knew him. The rest of us only ever saw and liked his public persona. Also, I'm not implying that his public persona was a lovely family entertainer whereas in reality he was a sexual deviant; in his personal life he was as complex a human being as anyone else in the world- not inherently good or bad. Who knows why he committed those crimes, but logically they don't define his entire personality, life and career, except in the eyes of the media.
I wouldn't feel bad or guilty about owning a Stylophone box with his face on it, similarly I don't feel bad listening to Phil Spector records (and his crime was infinitely more abhorrent- and he was a well documented abuser too), and if John Peel was posthumously linked to allegations it wouldn't affect my view of his radio work, unless it was on a Saville-esque scale.
And while Gary Glitter obviously committed abhorrent crimes when living in Asia and is terrifyingly remorseless, thinking that the Glitter Band had some absolute tunes doesn't make you a bad person. Rock and Roll Part 2 is played at sport events all the time in America without the entire world imploding.
Not to be a prude about this, but sexually assaulting an 8-year-old and conducting an abusive relationship with a 13-year-old is fairly serious.
The important issue from a fan's point of view is that these celebrities were able to carry out these crimes because they were enabled by the population at large, who were always keen to give them special treatment and always inclined to assume the best about them. In our society that means an unequal balance of power in your relationships with other people, and power corrupts, especially when you're the kind of attention-seeker who makes the effort to get famous in the first place. They did these things because they could, and they could because we let them.
Edit: If anyone hasn't read this piece from Andrew O'Hagan from a couple of years back then please have a look - it puts this all in context very well.
-- Edited by weej on Monday 7th of July 2014 03:16:46 AM
I agree (though can't put it so eloquently) - I think it is important particularly for musicians eg. Gary Glitter to separate their professional life from their personal. You can't deny that these people are perverted for what they have done but that doesn't meant that their influences or professional achievements are any less. Gary Glitter has some very good songs and was a big influence on pop music so I think that the whole thing with the BBC practically wiping him out of history is a bit ridiculous. I think it is possible to appreciate what these people have achieved without condoning what they have done