Odd Men Out
![pg-35-jefferies-4[1]](https://annaraccoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/pg-35-jefferies-41.jpg)
POSH! – ‘Loved culture, poetry’
CREEPY! – ‘Loner with blue rinse hair’
WEIRD! – ‘Strange talk, strange walk’
I was reminded of these devastating descriptions of the attributes that constitute a killer whilst watching the recent ITV dramatisation of the grilling Christopher Jefferies underwent when the tabloid finger of suspicion pointed in his direction. As far as I am aware, however, none of these attributes have yet to be recognised in law as criminal offences.
‘Strange talk, strange walk’ – okay, this presupposes there is a talk or a walk that isn’t strange; but where is the body busily setting the criteria that draws a distinction between acceptable talk and walk and unacceptable talk and walk? Christopher Jefferies’ loquaciousness is delivered in a florid fashion in which his tongue caresses each word to roll off it; then again, so does Giles Brandrith – the kind of person for whom the English language is far more than a basic tool of communication a notch above simian grunts, and is instead a strain of melodious rhythmic poetry. Today, this is an antiquated manner of speaking that has long been on the endangered list, but at one time every learned man in a position of power within the arts spoke in such a way – just watch archive film of John Osborne or Francis Bacon; neither emanated from the English aristocracy, but they followed what was then a well-established path of adopting a borderline RP accent and merely embellished it with flamboyant flourishes that complimented their creative personas.
What of the strange walk? This curious accusation that how Christopher Jefferies placed one leg in front of the other was somehow unnervingly at odds with the way in which the majority of the population does so implies he worked for the Ministry of Silly Walks. How one walks can depend on a variety of factors – social, occupational, biological; an eighteen-stone HGV driver will probably have a different walk to an eight-stone model, for example. Neither is the right way or the wrong way, and one would hardly expect a man of Christopher Jefferies’ age, upbringing and interests to plod along the street like a constipated Liam Gallagher looking for a fight.
Blue rinse hair! If this is creepy, then so are millions of old ladies up and down the country who indulge in a bit of follicle colouring once a month. Christopher Jefferies remained loyal to the traditional solution facing men of a certain age when their hair thins out – he kept it long at the sides and swept it across the barren crown in an act of delicate sculpture held in check by hairspray. The comb-over has now become a no-go area for any balding chap under forty, but was Christopher Jefferies supposed to shave his head as though he’d been drafted? Such a dramatic gesture would have been as inconceivable to him as it would have been to the likes of Cliff Michelmore, Frank Bough, Harry Carpenter, Robert Robinson, Richard Dimbleby or David Coleman, mainstay TV authority figures of the same era Christopher Jefferies sprang from. He saw nothing unusual in his individual coiffure until a source of mild amusement to the outside world was interpreted as the mark of a WEIRDO.
But the biggest crime of all in the eyes of the media was that Christopher Jefferies dared to be a posh man who loved culture and poetry. Dear me; does that mean he wasn’t up to speed on the latest text-speak slang or he didn’t care for Xboxes, iPhones, ‘Big Brother’, beer, tits and Enger-land? When Albert Steptoe attempted to curb Harold’s pretensions to improve his intellect, he dismissed ballet as ‘poof’s football’. After all, ballet, opera and the theatre in general is for them, not us – middle-class, elite, erudite, airy-fairy; a luxury pursuit for the pampered. It matters not that the founding fathers of the staunchly working-class cities of Britain channelled the increasing wealth of their industries into erecting civic stimulants for the masses – art galleries, museums and theatres; that was when thinking outside the limited box one was born into was encouraged; it was all part of bettering oneself, of seeking artistic enlightenment for malnourished minds and showing there was more to life than work, rest and play. Christopher Jefferies may be a man out of time, but he is being true to the extinct society that spawned him. He is impervious to the tidal wave of trivia and the here today/gone tomorrow anti-cultural narcotic that has been injected into the nation’s consciousness so that anything more demanding than a camera crew following Peter Andre to the toilet is deemed to be boring, where a yearning for substance is mocked, not only by one’s peers, but by a political consensus that places hard work and material gain above the fripperies of culture, where a house is not a home but an investment, and a university education is not a means of expanding the intellect but an extortionate shortcut to the supermarket shelf. Once the powers-that-be realised the public had twigged onto the truism that knowledge is power, they ensured the knowledge the public could access was utterly worthless.
At the time he was hurled from obscurity onto the front pages of everyone’s lives, Christopher Jefferies embodied the fear and mistrust the general public has been taught to harbour for anyone who has opted out of buying into the sedative of this century. He looked weird, he sounded weird, he had weird interests – that was enough to condemn him as guilty in the court of public opinion, that imaginary judicial institution so beloved of vote-chasers and tabloid editors. That this is a dangerous state of affairs to engineer is beyond doubt; to have the public marching to the rigid beat of one drum is a step away from fascism – and this extends from political legislation devised to silence opposing voices all the way down to neighbourhood gossip surrounding a resident who doesn’t fit in.
In a society where people of the same sex can marry each other and discrimination against the colour of skin, the choice of sexual preference and the disability of the physical is legislated against, a rather smug sense of triumphing over past prejudices prevails. But this doesn’t take into account the increasing isolation and pariah status of those who have either the conscious nerve or the oblivious instinct to follow their own unconventional path in looks, thoughts and interests. The Great British Eccentric, once celebrated and tolerated in equal measure, is an endangered species, not because the quirky nature of our islands no longer produces such characters, but because the egalitarian import of American cultural colonialism, whereby being one of the crowd is the desired place in society (not to mention the far-reaching influence of a certain media magnate who has imposed his similarly narrow views on the country for 40 years) has homogenised the opinions of the masses so that anybody who appears to be a square peg is a Weirdo at best and a Paedo at worst.
These are tough times for the odd men out. They no longer have a positive profile within the media – akin to the one, say, the late Patrick Moore had; the only profile they have is now that of the suspect outsider, the first candidate on the hit-list when a child goes missing. Many of the dead or elderly accused or imprisoned of sexual abuse over the past couple of years – Jimmy Savile, Stuart Hall, Rolf Harris, Cyril Smith, Edward Heath – could be said to be ‘weird’ by today’s standards. Is that enough to put them behind bars or piss on their graves? So it would seem.
Petunia Winegum
-
January 6, 2015 at 10:04 am -
Odd women, too. Don’t forget us. I’m considered eccentric for riding a bike over the age of 50. Mind you, so far I have only been accused of being a paedophile on twitter, where it’s such a routine accusation it hardly counts.
-
January 6, 2015 at 10:22 am -
If it hadn’t been a “sex killing” I doubt Jefferies would have been noticed by the media one way or the other.
-
January 6, 2015 at 10:37 am -
One of the first things I noticed on the turning of the tides was how the genuinely eccentric no longer has any place in British society – and this agenda has been masked by the “uniform individuality” of tattoos and silly haircut worn by the nations youth nowadays. To be eccentric is bad enough – to be both eccentric and “posh” equates to being a witch. And all in a ‘tolerant’ and ‘diverse’ society – odd, that.
-
January 6, 2015 at 10:41 am -
I’d be interested to see what falls within the ‘hate crime’ category – eccentric and posh probably don’t count.
-
January 6, 2015 at 10:47 am -
Eccentric most certainly does, but it has to be right sort of eccentricity.
http://www.tntmagazine.com/news/uk/assaults-against-goths-emos-and-heavy-metal-fans-to-be-recorded-as-hate-crime-by-manchester-police-
January 6, 2015 at 2:28 pm -
Speaking of Hate Crime:
“A worrying 119 children were accused of hate crimes [last year]”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/two-children-accused-of-committing-rape-in-greater-manchester-last-year-among-1000-child-crime-suspects-9953581.html
-
-
-
January 6, 2015 at 2:31 pm -
Way back in the 50s there was a cartoon that appeared in the Daily Express having a go at the new comprehensive schools. In it was a machine labeled, I think, education and a conveyor belt was feeding in children of all shapes, sizes and appearance at the other end the conveyor was outputting children all exactly alike.
Since that tryout by the conservatives (much decried by labor at the time) the labor party took it up and pushed it forward (education, education, education) to the mess of society we have today where standards are going backwards rather than forwards and those that would be eccentric inventors and such must either leave the country or try and conform – or else.
-
-
January 6, 2015 at 10:59 am -
There has always existed a hierarchy of people to look down upon. It was, in hindsight, very amusing as a teenager some 40 years ago to be despised by both straights and gays and I soon realised you need a spine and some wit to cope when you are at the bottom of that hierarchy, i.e. a weirdo.
The English eccentric is somewhat of a myth – it’s always been a euphemism in the same sense as “confirmed bachelor” or a woman wearing “sensible shoes”. It usually means – “I can’t put my finger on it, but they make me feel uncomfortable”. And in a way, that IS understandable – someone who is “weird” means they don’t accept the status quo and can therefore be a bit unpredictable
-
January 6, 2015 at 11:42 am -
Eccentricity was historically only ever something enjoyed by the aristocracy I think….
Society, as they used to call it….
http://flashbak.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/PA-409384.jpg
-
-
January 6, 2015 at 11:41 am -
Just imagine if he’d been a smoker as well……
-
January 6, 2015 at 11:41 am -
It is the law of nature. All social animals turn on any of their kind which are perceived to be different.
-
January 7, 2015 at 3:37 am -
Not true. Albinos, for example, generally are not treated any differently. Indeed, from a survival point of view, social animals would do well to congregate with noticeably different members of the same species in the hope that the noticeability was just as apparent to their predators.
-
January 7, 2015 at 8:14 am -
Untrue! Dead albinos are worth £20k to £50k, depending on which country in southern Africa they lived, as their body parts are most useful in getting a job/contract, attracting the opposite sex, becoming invisible while committing a crime and predicting the numbers for the lottery.
-
-
-
January 6, 2015 at 11:58 am -
Of course! You can no longer criticise (however well deserved) any of the ‘in’ groups
Blacks? That be’s rayciss innit
Homosexuals? You nasty homophobe you
muslims? Islamophobia!
Women? Jesus, don’t even go there, the shrill whining sound will drive you batty!But solitary White males? Go ahead, fill your boots!
-
January 6, 2015 at 12:25 pm -
Apparently the worst possible accusation these days is to be “a loner”. Every time a single man is arrested, if he doesn’t have any obvious girl or boy friend and lives by himself, he is described as a “loner”, and therefore apparently capable of almost any crime. I know lots of people who could be described as loners, in the limit they prefer their own company to that of other people. They are simply not interested in getting involved with other people because they find them totally uninteresting and their conversation a total waste of time, and at times I fully understand their reasoning when looking at some of my friends Facebook pages.
Even the police seem to accept the idea that if someone is a loner, he is probably the first person to be considered when looking for a criminal. I would probably have been a loner if I hadn’t married, I can’t see how this would make me any more likely to commit a crime unless you believe that my wife has some restraining influence.-
January 6, 2015 at 12:56 pm -
Perhaps the lone person is just an easier ‘nick’ for the cops because the loner is far less likely to have an alibi. Never underestimate idleness as motivation.
-
January 6, 2015 at 1:46 pm -
And also far less likely to have anyone to speak out on their behalf. No one to stoke the hashtag fire on bloody Twitter…
-
-
January 6, 2015 at 5:41 pm -
‘Kept himself to himself’
I recall the Telegraph actually said that about Jefferies in a headline.
-
-
January 6, 2015 at 1:40 pm -
A nicely written piece which pretty much sums up my feelings on the subject.
I only downloaded & watched the Jefferies drama a couple of weeks ago. The second part drifted off into soapbox territory, but the first part was fantastic.
Aside from his obvious eccentricities his refusal to tremble in awe before the cameras shoved before him may have played a part in the media’s decision to go after him. Having nothing to hide he had no “media facemask” to hide behind. Being upright & dignified are close to being considered eccentricites these days… Long live the freaks! -
January 6, 2015 at 2:05 pm -
Really good post Uncle Petunia which caused me to think a bit about my own prejudices
-
January 6, 2015 at 2:24 pm -
All very true, dear Petunia, but people should be proud to piss on Edward Heath’s grave anyway.
-
January 6, 2015 at 2:29 pm -
Why?
-
January 6, 2015 at 9:15 pm -
For selling our fishermen down the river. For lying about the Common Market to get us into it. For his gutless and incompetent efforts against the unions. And many other such abominations. He was as bad as that Harold Wislon.
-
January 7, 2015 at 11:47 pm -
Decimalisation. Reason enough to hate the fat treasonous bastard.
-
-
-
-
January 6, 2015 at 3:18 pm -
I live in Norfolk; Blue rinse and funny walks don’t even make the ‘Weird-O-Meter’ tingle here…try taking East Anglian Public Transport…like the song says ‘Another one rides the bus-dum-dum-dum. Another ONE rides the bus.HEY! Gonna sit next to you. Another one rides the bus’ (Wierd Al-to the tune of ‘Another One bites The Dust).
Say ‘hello’ to stranger (and they are STRANGE round this way) on the street here in passing and you’ll have a new, if somewhat dribbly, best friend for life.
-
January 6, 2015 at 4:13 pm -
dearieme : get in line !
Jeffries made the fatal error of believing (& demonstrating that at some length) he was in all ways superior to Plod when being questioned about the disappearance of his tenant. Said Plod had no compunction whatsoever is hanging him out to dry by dropping hints about the “oddness” of CJ to their chums in the media : throw into the mix a slow news period at Year End & the result was an eventual nice little earner for CJ from the Courts.
HNY all !
-
January 6, 2015 at 5:45 pm -
It is incomprehensible to me that the police would rely on shitty newspapers to do their investigating for them. Is that normal for police enquiries?
-
January 6, 2015 at 8:59 pm -
Ask Cliff Richard.
-
-
-
January 6, 2015 at 4:31 pm -
I agree that the first episode was the better of the two, and I couldn’t decide if it was fiction or not. The second episode was soapbox, and very much about the press being always wrong – they were in this instance, but always? Second episode revealed to me that it was a docudrama.
Actor who played the lead was excellent.
Perhaps not having come across the police very often, CJ didn’t know how ready they are to ‘fit you up’. to leak information to the press, or simply to behave badly.
-
January 6, 2015 at 6:08 pm -
Clearly, the Police leaked information to the Press because they ‘believed’ he was guilty.
-
January 6, 2015 at 6:36 pm -
The vilification of this man was, indeed, criminal. It tells us much about the stupidity of modern life, and the press.
-
January 6, 2015 at 7:04 pm -
And the banal crassness that goes with dumbed down education, body piercing, tribal tattoos and the overweight youth and their drinking culture. I treasure eccentrics but the above named want to ridicule them.
-
January 6, 2015 at 9:18 pm -
Did a tattooed youth once throw a beer bottle at your Sopwith Camel as you flew past?
-
January 6, 2015 at 9:28 pm -
One of today’s pierced, tattooed, overweight youth would be so bemused by a Sopwith Camel that s/he would stare mouth agape wondering why it had no humps that s/he could aim the beer bottle at.
-
January 7, 2015 at 8:44 am -
Or even with which preposition the sentence should be ended.
(Sorry, I’ll get my pedant cap and leave).
-
-
-
-
-
January 6, 2015 at 7:09 pm -
One of the best dramas on TV last year, I thought. Incidentally, the actor who played him was the marvellously weasel character in W1A. It did raise serious questions about the press, the police and the public, and it seemed to me it was given scant coverage in press reviews. I wonder if any journalist felt any touch of shame for what’s become a horrible trade.
-
January 7, 2015 at 7:59 am -
@mike fowle… any touch of shame for what’s become a horrible trade.
Journalism was once considered a profession but you are right to now call it a trade …..but there are many professions that have gone that way including the law reduced only to a trade because the main outcome pursued is financial gain rather than other goals that were once considered its principle objectives. But forever the optimist in respect of journalism I see rejection of the MSM much as I see rejection of main stream politics for much the same reasons and increasingly see distrust and rejection of the present legal process and suspect that alternatives will be looked for and found. Its dangerous old territory though if one thinks about it once trust in the professions and the institutions that are there to safeguard the tenets of a profession disappears. -
January 8, 2015 at 10:26 pm -
I was going to watch that, but switched off when the murder victim appeared in the distance waving at Jeffries. It just seemed poor taste dramatising it, as if they were using her murder as a prop for entertainment.
{ 41 comments… read them below or add one }