I Can’t Believe in Ghost

Believe in Ghosts

Leeds writer, Bowie fan, and shit-stirrer Mick McCann explains why he thinks Ghost The Musical was a load of crap …

I don’t know what’s wrong with me – well I do, I could make a list, run out of long words and simply illustrate my self-indulgence.

Here’s my problem. Faced with certain ‘cultural’ expression I get possessed by a self righteous certainty and sneer like a Fallow Deer. I’m fairly confident Fallow Deer don’t sneer but I like the rhyme – the simile scats well but means nothing. In my head all I can think is that’s not proper ‘culture’ or ‘art’, it just has a shiny surface.

Is this why certain cultural expressions make me spit and swear? Why do I alone know for sure what’s authentic or valuable? Where is the line between ‘culture’ and ‘art’ and does one even exist? At its broadest does culture include having a crap on a morning?

Take much grass roots or ‘community arts’. For me, they are infested with condescending bullshit. Cup cakes, knitting, making sock puppets or cards, jewellery or beads are hobbies and are best left behind in Guides or Scout’s huts. Craft, unless skilled in the extreme, is simply practical self indulgence – not necessarily a bad thing, but neither significant nor interesting to anyone other than, perhaps, those taking part. And even then, only as some form of meditation or sedation. It’s not a relevant form of cultural expression.

Crafts are also used by the middle or commissioning classes to patronise ‘ordinary’ people; ‘they’ve obviously nothing to say so why would you give them access to or encourage real forms of expression?’ They’d never say that out loud – too sensitive – but actions show the thought or the laziness….’here you are, decorate that for us.’

Let me take you back to my childhood. As an eight-yr-old I heard Mr David Bowie and was excited and fascinated. The following year he broke huge and I was right, I could gauge what was culturally relevant. I was also told by my elders and betters that I should like Elvis, but I simply didn’t, I could understand the buzz of the music but soon discovered he didn’t write any of it – barring half of ‘Shep’.

My young head decided that not only was he the music of parents, or even grandparents, but he was just a song and dance man, like any song and dance man from any music hall and, although good at singing and dancing, completely irrelevant to my life. I decided that to be ’important’ his input had to be more than a polished performance. Like Bowie, you had to create and have artistic control of your expressions and those expressions should go beyond fucking (trad love songs), fighting, strutting, having a good/bad time, easy stereotyping or formulaic offerings.

Now I think Bowie’s ‘70s output scarred me. It was challenging, shockingly experimental, brave, varied, imaginative, difficult, expansive, dark, risky, sometimes cynical, purposely positioned outside the mainstream and championing otherness and diversity. The freedom and depth of expression seemed more important than the reception or reaction it might provoke.

Right, what am I on about? Mr Phil Kirby of Culture Vulture Inc posted a tweet I took to be in praise of Ghost the musical at the Grand Theatre, I got that bubbling chest I’d get as a kid when people mentioned Elvis; I also have high regard for Phil as a cultural commentator but recommending a cheesy musical remake of a cheesy hackneyed film seemed completely out of character, making him a shameless traitor. I tweeted tetchily back, ‘I’d rather peel off my face with a scalpel and rub in rock salt,

He replied ‘ha, well I wasn’t expecting to like it … but the visuals and the illusions are sheer brilliance’

Me: ‘Apparently the lighting and costumes on Britain’s Got Talent were good…..it’s still sheer shite.’ To which he agreed.

The point I was trying to make is that the technical stuff, lighting, costume, set etc. is just smoke and mirrors covering the fact that that someone’s turning a very sentimental, old film into commercial, musical theatre for commercial gain. Same as opera, it’s pantomime in drag, as is most of our comfortable, inoffensive, re-hashing, national theatrical output. I can pop my finger in my mouth, blow and make a baseball cap magically lift up from my head, it’s not magic or art – It’s a shallow trick I occasionally do for children.

The point I was ignoring, and continue to ignore with most cultural output, was that it was fun escapism. Sometimes it is nice to just sit back and get dazzled by shiny bollocks. Not for me. I prefer spunk.

I think it’s in Orwell’s 1984 where there’s a woman hanging out washing, singing a meaningless tune that makes her life easier. The tune is provided by the totalitarian state that dictates all. I’m not sure why, but this has always seemed somehow relevant. Maybe I worry that meaningless drivel can switch off brains or, because we’re lazy, out-compete the thoughtful or challenging, making the latter less likely to be produced.

Perhaps sometimes it’s worthwhile for something to make us feel uncomfortable rather than pacify us. I’d rather be prodded than dazzled, it’s more likely to make me think, react or change.

Does art have to be shockingly new or original, an unfamiliar form, contain themes deftly explored, comment on or question social norms or situations, talk to our lives, contain honesty or raw emotions or any of the above? I don’t mind if you go see the 749th production of Annie as long as you accept it’s simply irrelevant shite that entertained you, cultural wallpaper. I don’t want to experience cultural expression that feels like comfy slippers I wear while having my blue-rinse applied. As I tweeted Phil, “I’d rather canoe down the Somali coast with a ‘Rich Westerner, no protection’ sign on my back.”

Right, if there are any gallery owners or arts commissioners out there I’d like to produce a meaningful piece of contemporary work for you, I’ll collect some horse droppings from Armley Moor, place it on a pedestal, light it beautifully with a lovely arrangement of angled mirrors onto which I’ll project stunning footage of horses and we’ll call it ‘It’s Still Horse Shit’. Now that’d be proper fucking art.

21 comments

  1. Theatre as the opium of the people? Well, for those of us with enough disposable income to indulge in live theatre instead of being spoon-fed drivel by the idiot box in the corner of the room, perhaps…

    Because everything in these financially-straitened times is driven by the bean counters’ drive for profitability instead of artistic merit, it easy to see why there is a tendency to play safe and look to put on things that have a broad appeal rather than to be challenging and innovative. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy of crap begetting crap – and no matter how many shiny lights and puffs of smoke you throw at it, a turd remains a turd no matter how you try to polish it.

    The sad thing is that if you managed to develop something genuinely innovative and get it staged somewhere, the chances are that nobody would come to see it – especially if it was on at the same time as Emmerdale, Corrie or Beast Enders.

    So what is to be done, Mick, to overcome this cultural lethargy, this opiated malaise? Or is the jackboot going to keep stamping on your face forever with anodyne and mundane pap?

    P. S. Nice to see Mr. McCann using his grammar school education to stir things up. Well done, sir!

    1. Or maybe that’s just what people want?

      I always find it a bit disconcerting when grammar school types tell us poor benighted comprehensive kids that we are fools for liking what we like and indoctrinated sheep if we don’t rise up and burn the theatres that put on musicals.

      Ghost was a hell of a lot of fun, but nobody in the audience took it seriously. I doubt it did any ideological damage. And there’s plenty of real shit going on right now that I can hardly see the onward march of the proletariat held back a second because we are all dreamily humming Dave Stewart tunes and watching the pretty light show.

      Come on you two, come and see Priscilla … it’s got Jason Donovan … in a dress!

      Afterwards we can go to the pub and discuss the negative dialectics of cross dressing and I’ll give you the correct post-structural, neo-Althusserian line on Neighbours if you think it’ll advance the class struggle any.

  2. So, Bowie wasn’t in it for the money? ( I know you didn’t actually say that, but still.) Selling, commercially, what the youth of the time wanted was how he made his name. And Labyrinth. I loved Labyrinth. But Bowie is very much ‘parents’ music to me – a skinny pretentious hipster wailing in tight trousers.

    My generation prefer rap music. The artists at least profess that dollar is at least partly what drives the form.

    Has this comment proved your point or refuted it? I can’t tell.

    1. Who says “Rap Music”? Apart from people who are too old/uncool to listen to Rap Music?

    2. Elfin, absoluely Bowie is parents music – having said that my 22 yr-old son, who listens almost exclusively to Black American (or influenced) music – but loves Bowie – recently tore a strip off me for not ‘educating’ my youngest in his Bowie. My 17 yr-old (into guitar based, mainly American ‘indi’) often bangs out Bowie loud. Yes I’ve indoctrinated them but the ’70s stuff is timeless.

      I think ’70s Bowie has meaning and will last because it’s edgy and experiment and warm and human – it moves people deeply. Other than a couple of crap singles, it’s in no way safe.

      i’m sure ’70s Bowie was driven by creativity not money. Probably the best example is his move from his ‘Plastic Soul’ to his ‘Berlin’ electronic. He’d conquered the world but, most importantly, topped (or near) the US charts for the first time and was still ‘cool’. He then turned up at his record company with an album so experimental and uncommercial (Low – a whole side of which was instrumental….kinda) that his record company dint even want to release it, telling him to forget it and go produce some more ‘souly stuff’, Bowie refused, he let them release it and then didn’t promote it in any way.

      Compared to the last two, the album did flop, got slated in things like the NME. So he made another darker, edgier, less commercial album. The song ‘Heroes’ (the most commercial song on the album) now gets played all over the damned place but at the time sounded extremely experimental and dint even chart in the top 20.

      Bowie made a decision in 1980 to make some money as he was skint (relative term). Over the length of his career he’s sold less albums than Phil Collins or Billy Joel, although I’m sure he could’ve done if his main motivation had been sales.

      Pretentious….probably but he can also move your soul.

  3. Ey Phil, stop being grammar schoolist. I’ll come back to you later.

    Chris I’d have needed to pay more attention to’ve recieved a decent education 😉 AND only half of my education was G the rest was comp…..not that it matters, I’m a grammar school boy at heart.

    Anyway, Chris, what to do is a big question….dunno.

    If I was deciding Arts Council funding my instinct would be to not give any money to theatre, opera, ballet, Shakey or classical music. Let ’em swim or drown.

    Although what I’d actually do (at first) would prob be leave all regional Theatre alone and cut the big 4 London/southern based comps to the same as top regional, no idea who or how much that is (prob Opera North or N Ballet and maybe £20-25million).

    Anyway I’m GUESSING that’d be £200-300 million which I’d throw at young people/modern stuff, contemporary music, film making, contemporary dance, comedy, annimation, writing of different types,etc I’d prob even check out apps, programming, game making.

    It would be a grant, but not just, if they made any kelly they’d give a percentage of profit back.

    NB All figures above are probably wrong.

    1. Ha, if someone lobs the Grammar school thing at you it would be silly not to return the volley.

      But it’s entirely irrelevant. You are wrong no matter what the quality of education you may have endured.

      I’m gonna have to Lend you Richard Hoggart’s book where he talks about arts funding (he was a Holbeck lad and the best chair the ACE ever had). He might even convince you about opera too … he’d agree on the cupcakes though.

  4. What am I wrong about?

    Mr Kirby, do we simply accept that the latest X-factor contetsant has the same artistic merit as Jacques Brel or Kanye West?

    I picked a bad example with Ghost as it’s commercial theatre, although the point that it’s just smoke and mirrors/shallow bling remains.

    I’m, probably in a confused menner, asking what is culture? Is it simply everything? What is ‘art’? Can we differentiate between the two? How do you judge? I personally know what’s good and shit but that’s subjective….although I’m rarely wrong.

    Why should opera recieve 90% of ACE music funding when jazz (with same size audience) might get 1%? Or why should R&B (or whatever it’s called today) with more fans in Leeds than Opera nationally get ziltch?

    If we removed two thids of funding to big 4 southern orgs they wouldn’t die, they’d charge a little more and we’d stop subsidisning, year in year out, the culture of the most affluent in our society. Most of who only go to witness perverse bling and to say they went for reasons of cultural capital.

    Yes I know your blind, one legged auntie, went to see Tosca on the cheap, concessions would remain.

    Deep down inside you know Ghost was the cultural equivalent of seeing Britains Got Talent live but are enjoying being a bit culturally mucky for a while.

    Ey, I’ve heard of Hoggart. 😉

  5. ‘Take much grass roots or ‘community arts’. For me, they are infested with condescending bullshit. Cup cakes, knitting, making sock puppets or cards, jewellery or beads are hobbies and are best left behind in Guides or Scout’s huts. Craft, unless skilled in the extreme, is simply practical self indulgence – not necessarily a bad thing, but neither significant nor interesting to anyone other than, perhaps, those taking part. And even then, only as some form of meditation or sedation. It’s not a relevant form of cultural expression.’

    I beg to differ Mick. Crafts put simply are skills left behind from a bygone era. Today as we know almost everything is made by machines in South East Asia. I think the resurgence of these crafts as seen in places like Fabrication, Bird’s Yard, Handpicked Hall ect ect is fueled by a yearning in people wanting to own something special and unique as opposed to the identikit sameness sold by the dominant high street chains. Personally I prefer the unique over the mass produced because individuality no matter what form of expression it takes is very important to me.

    1. Ì’ve not thought this through have I David? It’s Kirby’s fault, I was trying to do a quick, spontaneous post like he does, but I forgot he can write.

      Completely agree with you. But what I was talking about was when ‘the arts’ get people/communities involved. Too often for me it’s the equivalent of helpng them making paper aeroplanes when they could show great creativity.

      Example of good schemes or projects I’d cite would be the current Leeds Bigbookend’s LS13 book, Leeds Young Authors, Hebe Media basically saying ‘who wants to make a film? We’ll provide the gear and show how to use it.’ Or the project a couple of years ago that got old folk writing and performing.

      No doubt craft can have value but like most things it’s subjective. That fella who does incredibly life like paintings of elephants and sells them for thousands, for me, what’s the point just take a photo, whereas I might covet a good bit of stained glass work.

      1. I wouldn’t knock any of that (though the Hebe film where they are all freedom fighters – in Temple Works loading bay – still makes me chuckle) though I feel the same way about most state subsidized “yoof” stuff as you do about craft and commercialised theatre. It’s mostly utterly worthless, witless, self-aggrandizing, narcissistic bollocks.

        I take your point about the general distribution of arts funding. It has never been good for “popular” art and is heavily biased to the South … and it’ll probably get worse from today with the reorganisation of ACE.

  6. Hey, Mick, you remember when you tried to defend the indefensible at Bettakultcha? Well I’m glad to see that you’ve come to your senses and decided to attack the indefensible instead.

    For opera to secure so much arts funding when it appeals to a tiny minority of the population can only be attributed to one thing – privilege. OK, you can make an argument about preserving exquisite art forms against the onslaught of rough, popular culture for so long but eventually it begins to sound like the fables that privileged bullies trot out when they want their way, such as “bankers create wealth/jobs” etc. Arts funding is controlled by an elite – there is no popular vote by the people about which art-form should get the most funding – so the bulk of it goes to their elitist chums.

    However, I’ve stuck my oar in here to point to an exemplary outlier to the arguments expounded in these comments. No surprises that I invoke Bettakultcha as the exception that proves the rule.

    i) Bettakultcha has no arts funding whatsoever, never has
    ii) it is a popular art-form* with the general public
    iii) it is a craft movement promoting presentation skills and story telling techniques within communities
    iv) it is an open platform allowing access to all
    v) it allows innovative and subversive ideas (you should know this Mick as you’ve contributed some yourself)

    And, as this forum seems so appropriate, I will break the latest Bettakultcha news here; we are in serious talks with the West Yorkshire Playhouse to host an event there. Should that come off, it will provide the perfect storm for you Mr McCann. I will await your highly crafted horse-shit to hit that particular fan with great interest …

    *The latest development for Bettakultcha is the Art Furnace:
    https://theculturevulture.co.uk/festivals/arts-festivals/bettakultcha-comes-to-hebden-bridge-arts-festival/

  7. Nobody like a sore loser Ivor 😉 ….yes I know I got the sympathy vote and the judge was biased.

    Bettkultcha, great example of relevant cultural expression.

    I’ve heard the new bloke at WYP is doing good things and put me down for The High Arts, What A load Of Old Bollocks presntation.

  8. Bit late to this debate, but…

    The problem you seem to have, Mick, is that you want ALL art to be as edgy as late 70s Bowie (whom I LOVE!). Personally, I’d find that exhausting. And of all the things you want to attack, you go for a musical on at the Grand? Is that really the thing that gets your goat the most? I note, by the way, that you don’t review the show. Have you seen it? If not, then how can even write this? How would you feel if someone slagged of Low or Heroes or Lodger without having heard them?

    I don’t like this low art/high art dichotomy. I think it’s bollocks. I think there are things that people like and things that they don’t. You and I might all despise Celine Dion, but am I going to angry about her right to bawl out her dreadful tunes? Am I even going to waste time worrying about it? Not really.

    I’m always suspicious of arguments that totally discount entire art forms. It’s like when people say they ‘don’t like musicals’. I’m like, what you don’t like Cabaret, for example? What I think they often mean is that they don’t like schmaltzy Lloyd Webber crap. For the record, I think the modern musical is in a parlous state, with the obvious exceptions (Avenue Q, Book of Mormon by the sounds of it). And yes, there is a lot not to like about a cynical repackaging of a movie as musical. But hell, I haven’t been, so I wouldn’t know. But what I will say is that I love the greatest expressions of the form. Singin’ In the Rain is probably my favourite film of all time – and it would be hard to find a musical that is both more joyous and subversive at the same time. It both celebrates AND has a pop at the industry it represents. And it’s a lot more colourful than late 70s Berlin to boot 😉

    So in the end, what is this about? It feel like you’re angry because stuff like this doesn’t speak to you. But isn’t it a bit condescending to imply that anyone who does enjoy is an Orwellian drone who isn’t thinking for themselves? Surely they just enjoy different stuff than you do. And isn’t it great that there’s room for all of us in this crazy world?

    1. David, I’ll come back and respond, just had to re-type all that last post…..GRRRRRRR.

  9. I think Bettakultcha is very relevant to this debate because, as mainstream theatre tries to stop its audiences dwindling by putting on alternative representations of films and TV programmes with mass appeal, so those art forms are also losing their audiences in television and cinema to more self-produced content via the internet.

    And, while the big theatres are putting on tripe like Ghost and X-Factor losers singing karaoke, so the counter-culture is generating its own entertainment via forms such as Bettakultcha. You can see a parellel thing in the “unconference” movement, where professionals are rejecting the stage-managed conference in favour of events which give a voice to everyone present and crowd source new solutions better than those normally handed down from the conference podium.

    And, as a Coda. Bowie got himself an international platform by producing three of (in my opinion) the greatest albums of all time (Hunky Dory, Ziggy Stardust, and Aladdin Sane), which gave him the freedom to spend the rest of his life exploring many (again, in my opinion) musical dead ends which have interested himself and not that many others. That is his right. I just wish he had carried on making music that I like.

  10. OMG John you need to go listen to Diamond Dogs,Young Americans or Low (although it’s probably too late)and those last two (as well as StationtoStation) certainly outsold Hunky Dory and Ziggy by a long way so they weren’t just self indulgent musical dead ends.

    I’d also argue that after Aladdin Sane Bowie lead popular music by the nose for years.

    But it’s interesting, even though you don’t like those albums, I’m sure I could sit you down in a room and play them to you and you’d agree they have artistic merit, relevance and be able to differentiate them from a Steps album or any other cultural wallpaper.

    Good points on Bettakultcha, and perhaps this sea of cultural shite will sporn some relevant stuff as a backlash.

  11. Gosh, some very wishful thinking there, John P. I don’t want to denigrate the great work of Bettakultcha (and I think I’d be lynched on this site if I did!), but I think that’s an awfully lofty claim.

    Firstly, theatre audiences aren’t dwindling. In fact, a lot of regional theatres – DESPITE the Coalition cuts – are doing very well, audience-wise. Also, are you implying that the only thing that Grand puts on is stuff like Ghost? I’ve seen some amazing shows there in the last year, including One Man, Two Guvnors and Avenue Q, not to mention amazing live scored silent films and brilliantly leftfield kids theatre at its Howard Assembly Rooms. And then there’s the Playhouse. If something like their Tranform programme is challenging, artistically driven and experimental, then what is? Isn’t that precisely an attempt to engage with that DIY ethos?

    Secondly, I’ve enjoyed the Bettakultchas I’ve attended, though I do think they are rather hidebound by the rather random quality of those speaking, but I really can’t see how it’s an alternative to theatre. It’s a FANTASTIC idea, but it’s nothing like theatre. And it’s getting an absolute fraction of the audiences of a show on at the Grand, so to proclaim the death of regional theatre producers in favour of a proud DIY enterprise like Bettakultcha does seem rather fanciful.

    I’ve heard the same talk about TV channels. TV’s dead, apparently. Yeah, that’s why 10 million people watched the climax of Broadchurch LIVE. That’s a beautifully-crafted, intelligent piece of drama, by the way, not a shitty game show or talent contest. The implication – that Mick makes in his original piece and you back up in your post – is that mainstream art is totally money-driven, morally bankrupt and crass. That’s too black and white a view for my taste. The ‘mainstream’ is a wide river, and it contains both the Ziggy Stardust album and (yup) Ghost.

    The big, traditional institutions will not suddenly die just because new forms come along. Indeed, the smart ones will find ways to adapt. WYP’s Transform (with a lot of site specific theatre in its programme) is one obvious example. There’s room for DIY and there’s room for arts institutions. And actually, they’re often not as exclusive as you might think.

    So good luck to Bettakultcha, long may it thrive. But I don’t think the Grand is quaking in its boots because of its existence.

    1. Some sensible, realistic things said here. TV is still a massive influence in many people’s lives – I just need to look at my twitter feed when a popular show is on to discover that.
      Culture goes through cycles like anything else and interesting things happen when a sector of society feels disenfranchised by a dominant influence. Punk was a reaction to the overblown music at the time and Bettakultcha is a reaction to heavily stage managed events.
      I think what is being discussed here is how easy it is to slip into a comfortably numb routine of pre-digested culture and that we should all be on our guard for it. The fact that this discussion has taken place and attracted such interest is a healthy sign that some of us aren’t quite ready for the Novocain just yet …

Comments are closed.