top | item 34709279

The Chemistry of ‘Yes Minister’ (2017)

161 points| lnyan | 3 years ago |sphericalbullshit.wordpress.com | reply

79 comments

order
[+] dia80|3 years ago|reply
True Story: I visited No. 11 Downing Street as a school boy in 1998 when Gordon Brown, our local MP, was chancellor. He took us next door to no. 12 where Nick Brown was chief whip, he started pointing out things in his office and as he was doing so a side door opened and a man stepped in. He pointed at the man and said "And that's a civil servant". The man reversed course, closed the door, opened it again and stuck his head around and said "Yes, minister". My classmates didn't get the joke, I did but was too stunned to laugh as Nick Brown and Gordon Brown had fallen about laughing and I was just thinking "aren't you meant to be running the country and not making TV jokes?" To be fair it was pretty funny :)
[+] freddyym|3 years ago|reply
Great story related to a great show, thanks for sharing!
[+] cletus|3 years ago|reply
I grew up watching Yes, (Prime)? Minister. The 70s to the early 80s were really the golden age of British TV. This show, Blake's 7 (if you like sci-fi and haven't seen this it's still great, go watch it), Dr Who's golden years (ie Tom Baker), even the Goodies. probably even Grange Hill (which had a high school student die of a heroin overdose).

One particularly prescient piece was the Nuclear Deterrant [1]. Even 40+ years ago this episode argued that nuclear weapons were mostly pointless because you'd never use them and instead you should invest in smart weapons. The linked segment even has a line that the Soviets can't take Western Europe, they can't even hold Afghanistan. Consider that in light of Ukraine. Think about where munitions have gone and "smart" weapons are particularly prevelent.

And of course the writing and performance for Sir Humphrey in particular was absolutely top notch.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4

[+] karencarits|3 years ago|reply
> Nuclear Deterrant

Also on Nuclear Deterrant: https://youtu.be/N6Et35vPYLg?t=184

    > Jim: Sometimes wonder why we need the weapons
    > Sir Humphrey: Minister, you are not a unilateralist?
    > Jim: Sometimes wonder, you know
    > Sir Humphrey: Well then you must resign from the government!
    > Jim: Nonono, I am not that unilateralist. The Americans will always protect us from the Russians, wouldn't they?
    > Sir Humphrey: Russians? Who's talking about the Russians?
    > Jim: Well, independent deterrent...
    > Sir Humphrey: It's to protect us against the French!
    > Jim: The French? But.. But.. They are our allies! And partners!
    > Sir Humphrey: Well, that are now, but they've been our enemies for most of the past 900 years. If they have got the bomb, we must have the bomb
[+] dingosity|3 years ago|reply
Yup. Kind of amazing what you can do with decent stories. Blake's 7 and 70s Doctor Who were notorious for cheezy effects, sets, props and costumes. But the stories really were pretty decent. Blake's 7 eventually annoyed me by how slow it progressed, but if you relax and accept that it's slower than your typical trek episode, it's perfectly fine.

The same era saw Survivors, The Tripods and Children of the Stones. Cheezy effects but very decent stories and still worth watching.

[+] hnbear|3 years ago|reply
Yes, Minister was the original series.

Yes, Prime Minister was a follow-up after Jim Hacker is elected Prime Minister. The series is just a continuation and just as funny, or more so.

[+] marcosdumay|3 years ago|reply
It doesn't say they are pointless. It says one would never use them (there is no worst case scenario that wouldn't became worse by using them), but for them not to be used, one has to have them.

Or, basically, it explained MAD.

[+] chadcmulligan|3 years ago|reply
Some great shows, if you're talking nuclear deterrent, 'Whoops Apocalypse' was a great mini series from the same era, that I still revisit now and then.
[+] hnbear|3 years ago|reply
When I was in high school (in the UK) we had a talk from someone who had been the Principle Private Secretary to the prime minister in the 80s and 90s, as well as cabinet secretary. Similar roles to Bernard and Sir Humphrey.

He commented on how incredibly accurate the show was, not just in the humour, but in the rules, regulations, behaviour of the characters, etc.

Even small details were accurate, like the time Jim (through Bernard) locks the door between Downing St and the cabinet office. We were told how there was a single door, and use was a privilege afforded to specific roles, and it could be cut off.

For all its excellent humour, it was especially biting for how true and accurate it was about basically everything. The scenarios were all cleverly written to be generic enough to be timeless, while also specific enough to the time.

We still argue about the value of nuclear deterrents, for example, and the politicians still mindlessly chase votes and vote winning ideas and slogans.

[+] billytrend|3 years ago|reply
The person you’re talking about is my grandpa, Robin Butler. He has some great stories! Cool to see him mentioned on hacker news
[+] harry8|3 years ago|reply
What has dated is that in the series they were all "jolly nice chaps" and the public service was super-competent if not always directed in the way one might like. Awfully pleasant "deep state" in the modern parlance.

It seems much harder to suspend that disbelief on either competence or that they're all very sound and nice people. Is that just my ageing or have things changed a little?

[+] rcarmo|3 years ago|reply
I recently re-watched the first few seasons with my kids (who are now teens and were, beyond all expectations, absolutely riveted to the screen). I wholly agree with the "somewhat-Machiavellian" moniker regarding Sir Humphrey, but it is quite fun to watch the tables turn as the Minister (sometimes) gets the upper hand.

That episode, in particular, was hilarious and felt very, very much up to date, and highlighted (also to my kids) how people "in charge" and "scientifically correct" could be overwhelmed and undermined by those kinds of situations.

[+] sundvor|3 years ago|reply
Thanks, I shall rewatch it with my 12 year old boy now - good tip! I'm already on a roll of watching classics not rewritten for a modern audience, it's been a complete hit so far.

I completely loved it growing up in the 80s. It was simply brilliant. And as a Norwegian, I credit the show (along with Monty Python) with my spoken English ending up British style rather than American, which seems to have been the norm. My group of friends would mimic their ways of talking all day long. :)

[+] jl6|3 years ago|reply
If you’ve ever wondered why you like both Yes Minister and Clue (the 1985 movie), it’s because they both come from the pen of Jonathan Lynn.

Who can’t hear an echo of Sir Humphrey in this exchange?:

Colonel Mustard: "No" meaning "yes?" Look, I want a straight answer, is there someone else, or isn't there, yes, or no?

Wadsworth: No.

Colonel Mustard: No there is, or no there isn't?

Wadsworth: Yes.

[+] ryzvonusef|3 years ago|reply
I miss this show and its characters.

My father was a stenographer in a ministry (perhaps the Bernard equivalent), and he loved this show because it hit close to home, despite not being from the same country, issues were still the same. And I loved watching it with him.

Now all three of the stars are dead, my father has passed away too, and every time I see a clip of the show on Youtube, it hurts a little, the nostalgia cuts.

[+] dingosity|3 years ago|reply
Growing up, my dad was a US Congressman (and later chief of staff of a different congressman's office and in retirement a minor functionary in the county tax office.)

I LOVED Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister. To this day I ramble on about meeting minutes in attempted imitation of Humphrey Appleby.

I knew Jay and Lynn were onto something when my father watched 5 minutes of one episode and said "I ain't watchin' that bullshit. It's too much like work."

Speaking of chemistry, I caught the play at Chichester a while back (with different actors.) Perfectly good acting and perfectly good writing, but the "chemistry" was definitely different. Not better. Not worse. Just different.

[+] AlbertCory|3 years ago|reply
YM and YPM are amazing in that there are almost zero other political comedies that have any life beyond a year or two. Those shows are still hilarious even 30 years later.

Last time this topic came up, someone put me on to "The Thick of It" which is quite different but also very funny. Too bad you have to subscribe to BritBox to see all of it, AFAIK.

[+] askvictor|3 years ago|reply
"The Thick of it" is basically YM/YPM transposed in the modern age, namely the media/spin cycle being at the centre of politics. It's a very worth successor.
[+] InCityDreams|3 years ago|reply
Would HIGNFY be considered a political comedy?
[+] hnthrowaway0315|3 years ago|reply
YM and YPM are gems that will shine almost forever, as long as human minds don't change.

Salut to the authors, and Salut to the trio that shall live eternally in our hearts.

[+] db48x|3 years ago|reply
That is one of the more memorable episodes. Even the head of the British Chemical Corporation has no clue what he‘s talking about; he’s a political appointee with no actual chemistry education, since this is a nationalized industry. They’re not holding back in this episode.
[+] ly3xqhl8g9|3 years ago|reply
"It would appear that the American report leaves some important questions unanswered, some of the evidence is inconclusive, some findings have been questioned, and the figures are open to interpretation and different results might come from a widened, more detailed study over a longer time scale." [1]—words that killed any possibility of science under the umbrella of the political since 1981.

I don't understand why the author needs to qualify: "Yes, Minister is one of the most seminal British political satires", it simply is the most seminal political satires [2], together with the follow-up, Yes, Prime Minister [3].

[1] Around minute 25 of the episode 4, season 2.

[2] Of course, some might say de gustibus, however, even Veep could not succeed in combining wit, humor, and relevancy in such a manner. Not to even mention the unique use of the English language: any of the Humphrey-ian soliloquyial verbiages is up there with any speech from Hamlet and above. The fact that there are so few episodes certainly helps in keeping the essence dense.

[3] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086831/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

[+] TazeTSchnitzel|3 years ago|reply
Hey, the free market is also good at finding CEOs who don't understand their industries.
[+] onethought|3 years ago|reply
Modern Australian Equivalent of this is Utopia, though it’s focused on the bureaucrats instead of the politicians. Chemistry/Writing/Performance all really hit the mark For the Australian Public Service.
[+] cjak|3 years ago|reply
And The Hollowmen, which is set in the Prime Minister's Office and is made by the same team.
[+] askvictor|3 years ago|reply
(until I read the article, I, too, thought it was about the 'chemistry' between the actors. No, it's actually about atoms-and-molecules chemistry)
[+] kwertyoowiyop|3 years ago|reply
The scary thing about Yes Minister is that most episodes were based on actual events.
[+] WeylandYutani|3 years ago|reply
I love this show. It really makes fun of the fact that the people who run the country are the civil service not the elected representatives. Which is probably for the best.
[+] zem|3 years ago|reply
quite possibly my favourite tv show of all time, though it's hard to compare across genres. definitely my favourite tv comedy, beating out even the excellent "jeeves and wooster" adaptation.
[+] randcraw|3 years ago|reply
Blackadder too? Bite my tongue.
[+] ngcc_hk|3 years ago|reply
The slice by slice approach talked in there for whether to push the nuclear bomb is a good strategy for Russian. They have got 1 and 3 and … if they kept on doing that where is Ukraine to defend against.

Great for Ukraine Russia did not learn the lesson of how they take a bit and German can still build stream II and we still have Olympic etc.

Luckily for us all. Better of course if they do not invade. Tell chinese about Taiwan. They cannot help themselves.

[+] v8xi|3 years ago|reply
Just a helpful acrostic I remember from organic chemistry: ROMP. R is your reference chain, then ortho, meta, para as you go around the ring.