Before the first, inevitable drop of blood is spilled, may I congratulate both Helen and Christian for giving us this blog’s only true water cooler moment so far. From the vantage point of my sickbed, I’m envisaging battle lines being drawn throughout the building; DJs divided, sales execs segregated, middle-manager turning against middle-manager.
In one corner, the hawkish, self-styled “O.C.”, who, having doubtlessly poured his very soul into this new tome, feels aggrieved at having his lovingly wrought handiwork besmirched here in his supposed heartlands.
In the other, Helen Hurley, a headstrong, intelligent lawyer who has devoted her professional life to defending the weak and seeking justice for the downtrodden. In corporate law. The moral high ground just turned to quicksand there, Helen.
Hurley threw the first punch, raining a brutal mauling on Christian’s broad-brushstrokes spin on the battle-of-the-sexes. Was it justified? Is ‘The Men Commandments‘ really intended as a blueprint for the modern man? A ‘Das Kapital‘ for neo-blokeism? Or is it merely a lovingly put-together print version of Christian’s radio stock-in-trade: A celebration of what’s on the mind of the man-in-the-street/pub/van, distilled and imbued with O’Connell’s knockabout humour?
As a (flawed) feminist, I fully agree with the point Helen makes: That western society (with the possible exception of the Nordic countries) is still horribly patriarchal and to pretend otherwise is at best blinkered and at worst outright sexist. The upward trajectory of the line on the graph through the past century from Mrs Pankhurst took a sharp hit with laddism, and has never really recovered; flat-lining since roughly Abi Titmuss’s first Nuts magazine topless photoshoot.
The question is does ‘The Men Commandments‘ have any part to play in this? Does it thicken the fog of ignorance? Is there a genuine danger in the barstool wisdom, armchair ranting and familiar slice-of-life caricatures that have made rich men of the likes of Jeremy Clarkson and Peter Kay, and with whom Christian will jostle to fill stockings this Xmas?
Christian’s retribution was merciless. It may be of note that it was posted late-afternoon, possibly as he emerged from a nap. His response brings to mind a hungry bear prematurely woken from its hibernation, growling loudly and swiping in all directions. His words are atypically angry and imprecise as he rises to the bait.
Like an angry music fan on the Melody Maker’s letters page, he tears the review to shreds, his opening gambit being to question whether Helen has fallen prey to some kind of literary version of Stockholm Syndrome, and is now actually in love with her tormentor, ‘The Men Commandments’. He briefly lightens the mood with an acerbic joke, recalling Joan Crawford’s exchanges with Bette Davis, before landing the killer blow: Helen is unique for her gender in her dislike of ‘The Men Commandments’. All other women like it.
Helen is immediately cast as a lone voice in the wilderness. The Loose Women, Cat MacDonald and Clare Baker are all in one, cool gang. She isn’t. She is a pariah. Even Mrs Dickens has read it in its entirety. (Oi, Christian! Fancy handing out freebie copies to the boss’s wife when your DJ pals here at the coalface haven’t had one yet! You old player, you… )
Seeing his opponent squirming on the floor, O’Connell offers a brief truce, graciously agreeing to disagree, but then the red mist of fury rises again and POW! The Queensbury rules are right out of the window and he aims a vicious kick well below the belt with the now infamous ‘husband’ line.
Ever the salesman, he ends with a plug for the book and a quote from Britain’s best selling newspaper, and scourge of sexual deviants everywhere, The News of the World.
Whose side are you on? Christian understandably feels hurt that something he has laboured over for a long time, cares about, and is proud of has been disloyally savaged on his home territory. Helen used an uncensored, open forum where honest opinion is encouraged, to comment on something she felt was pertinent to us all here at One Golden Square. She didn’t hold back and found herself on the end of a stinging personal attack.
Like my beloved Sweden, I’m staying neutral. One thing’s for sure: I’ll certainly be borrowing a copy of ‘The Men Commandments’ from my local lending library to see what all the fuss is about. Have I just stumbled upon something there? Now that this blog is read by thousands, and under the intense media scrutiny of the Digital Spy Radio Forum and MediaGuardian’s Monkey Column, could this whole slanging match be a giant stunt? Devised and stage managed by O’Connell himself to drum up a bit of controversy around the publication date? With Hurley taking a dive for a bung?
It’s certainly a good conspiracy theory. After all, there’s no such thing as bad publicity… (although I’m sure Gary Glitter would beg to differ.)
Geoff
