Remembering Jimmy

[poliphilo]

To be honest I thought he was naff but not exactly monstrous. I watched Jim'll Fix It because everyone did.  It was the kind of TV show you forget as soon as you leave the sofa. I thought he was merely an entry in the bizarre history of taste- a thing cultural historians of the future would scratch their heads at and wonder. 

Now I lie in bed at night and ask what the hell was going on. He wasn't talented. He wasn't funny. He had an instantly recognizable schtick but it wasn't particularly entertaining. Most of the people who rubbed up against him found him creepy (or that's what they're saying now). So how did this strange, empty little person get to be such a power in the land? For as long as he was alive he remained untouchable. He may not have had personal friends but he had plenty of establishment ones- the BBC, successive Prime Ministers, politicians, police chiefs, health chiefs, religious leaders, Prince Charles. He had the entree to any institution he wanted. He garnered two knighthoods- one from the Queen and one from the Pope. How did all that come about?  Were all those good people fooled, corrupted or compliant? How does this scandal relate to all the other scandals that are mushrooming up in its wake?

I need to know. I need to find out what kind of a country it is I've been living in these past sixty years. 

Comments

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

He did raise a lot of money for charity throughout his career, right from the start. I believe that's why he received the honours. I can't remember whether it was on your LJ that I mentioned my mother telling me how two nuns had come into our shop in Manchester, enthusing over how Savile was coming to open their fete? They knew that having a real celebrity (he was only on Top of the Pops in those days, but that was enough) would draw the crowds and ensure better takings for their charity. Of course his "in" with the pop stars, the real big names, would have been the bait he used to entice young girls into his clutches. :(

What I can't understand is how he squared his sexual predation with his charity work. Was he actually cynical enough to use the charity work as cover for his evil doing? Or did he have some warped idea of atoning for his sins by doing good?

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I've no idea how he squared things. If he was a psychopath- as I suspect he was- questions of conscience wouldn't have arisen.

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

I actually don't think he was a psychopath. It's nice for men to think that he was somehow intrinsically different, but as rosamicula puts it so eloquently, he was only different in scale, not in what he did. Lots of older men are attracted to girls of 14-15. Girls of 14-15 are often desperately trying to look older than they are and prefer a relationship with an older man. The older man, being in the position of responsibility, should resist temptation, but many don't.

I actually don't like the mixing up of the Savile case with the abuse of young boys at children's homes. I'm not condoning what Savile did, but it's not at all the same and, again as rosamicula said, was part of the celebrity culture of the time.

I personally can't remember being sexually propositioned as a young teen, but I was very aware of the possibility and you learn to be on your guard at all times.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I think you're going easy on Savile. A normal man might take opportunities as they came up, but Savile seems to have organised his life so as to have had access to kids- not just teenage girls but little boys as well. He wangled his way into Broadmoor, Stoke Mandeville, Leeds General and various other institutions. He invested a vast amount of time and energy into his predation. It went far beyond taking advantage of groupies.

I don't think he can be linked to the North Wales children's homes, but we know he visited Haut de la Garenne on Jersey. There are rumours that he pimped HdeG kids to his estblishment friends. I don't know what weight to accord these rumours, but they exist.