Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fantastic Mr. Fox (2005)

granta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 25 posts

Re: Fantastic Mr. Fox (2005)

#11

Post by azeotropic »

pjc50 wrote: post #8
azeotropic wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. This shows some of the worst flaws of modern journalism: The smarmy tone, writing the story about personalities rather than facts, the narcissistic urge of the journalist to insert himself into the story. It's a travesty.

So, what's the alternative? And would it be as interesting to read? People generally like the human interest aspect. Especially as this isn't "news" but more a form of anthropology, a visit to two secretive warring tribes of rural Britain.

I think the fact that the journalist is pushing the warring tribes narrative is part of the problem. I should have listed that among its flaws.

The journalist here is egging the two sides on, deliberately setting up confrontations, and rooting for blood. It's interesting read because it stimulates your lizard brain, but it's not good journalism.

Re: Fantastic Mr. Fox (2005)

#13

Post by pjc50 »

azeotropic wrote: post #11
pjc50 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what's the alternative? And would it be as interesting to read? People generally like the human interest aspect. Especially as this isn't "news" but more a form of anthropology, a visit to two secretive warring tribes of rural Britain.

I think the fact that the journalist is pushing the warring tribes narrative is part of the problem. I should have listed that among its flaws. The journalist here is egging the two sides on, deliberately setting up confrontations, and rooting for blood. It's interesting read because it stimulates your lizard brain, but it's not good journalism.

The confrontations were always there - the two sides were engaged in regular confrontations for years. If anything the journalist tries to defuse it at one point by pulling the "I'm with the press" card, and eventually sets up a non-confrontation reminisce between the two old men of the old sides.

Re: Fantastic Mr. Fox (2005)

#14

Post by pjc50 »

smackay wrote: post #9
azeotropic wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. This shows some of the worst flaws of modern journalism: The smarmy tone, writing the story about personalities rather than facts, the narcissistic urge of the journalist to insert himself into the story. It's a travesty.

I think it caught the spirit of the conflict, which is inherently political and cultural, rather well. It also appears well researched. The conversation with Tony Banks and his references to Peter Freeman give a lot of historical perspective and how society and the role of the state/establishment is changing, albeit slowly. So there are plenty of facts, just not simplistic ones. A review of the situation in 2019 woul…

Poisoning and shooting protected birds is still illegal, but as the article subtly points out, there is almost zero chance of it being prosecuted.

The foxhunting issue is still ongoing: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-468...

Since the article was written in 2005 the obvious analogy was the Iraq war; today it would be Brexit.

Re: Fantastic Mr. Fox (2005)

#16

Post by azeotropic »

pjc50 wrote: post #13
azeotropic wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the fact that the journalist is pushing the warring tribes narrative is part of the problem. I should have listed that among its flaws. The journalist here is egging the two sides on, deliberately setting up confrontations, and rooting for blood. It's interesting read because it stimulates your lizard brain, but it's not good journalism.

The confrontations were always there - the two sides were engaged in regular confrontations for years . If anything the journalist tries to defuse it at one point by pulling the "I'm with the press" card, and eventually sets up a non-confrontation reminisce between the two old men of the old sides.

I don't see how bringing the activist into a bar full of hunters and then announcing that you're his protector is anything like trying to diffuse conflict. Acting like a macho tough guy and flippantly giving a library card as a press credential when you get called out is a pretty cheeky thing to do.

Re: Fantastic Mr. Fox (2005)

#17

Post by gcb0 »

> shout ‘Free Tibet’ into the startled [chinese] premier’s car. When the pictures of his solo protest appeared on Channel 4 News, he lost his job at London Underground.

what a pathetic society.

Re: Fantastic Mr. Fox (2005)

#18

Post by uberman »

Interesting article. I have two bits to offer.

Firstly, when I was young, my dad used to judge fox hunting. The trials he judged were almost never to the "death" though. He once told me that he only saw a hound actually catch a fox once when the fox ran though a culvert while the hound ran over it and got to the end first. There is a clear opportunity to separate the hunt from the kill.

The second is that I now live on a rather large piece of property. Some fields and some woodland. We allow a local group of "fox hunters" use our property as part of their hunt. While they show up with a dozen horses and twice as many hounds on a semi-regular basis, they don't actually hunt or chase fox. Prior to the hunt the hound master comes to our property and uses a scent rag of some kind to scent a trail for the hounds to follow.

In fact, there is a fox den within 50m of my home office and the hounds show no interest in the den. Fox tend to raise their kits "closer" to people as coyotes (the main local threat to fox) are reluctant to come as close to people as fox are. Not great news for my chickens as we loose one or two a month to the fox, but that is the price I pay for living where I do.

The gist of it is this. It is unfortunate that the various players can't typically reach a compromise. There seems to be ample opportunity to do so. I live in a world where the "fox" hunting tradition thrives and yet no fox are actually chased let alone killed.

Re: Fantastic Mr. Fox (2005)

#19

Post by pjc50 »

azeotropic wrote: post #16
pjc50 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The confrontations were always there - the two sides were engaged in regular confrontations for years . If anything the journalist tries to defuse it at one point by pulling the "I'm with the press" card, and eventually sets up a non-confrontation reminisce between the two old men of the old sides.

I don't see how bringing the activist into a bar full of hunters and then announcing that you're his protector is anything like trying to diffuse conflict. Acting like a macho tough guy and flippantly giving a library card as a press credential when you get called out is a pretty cheeky thing to do.

Farmyard, rather than bar: "we drove into a farmyard full of farmhands and hunt supporters."

> Acting like a macho tough guy and flippantly giving a library card as a press credential when you get called out is a pretty cheeky thing to do.

Flippant, yes, macho .. not exactly. It is however extremely English, this kind of whimsicality in the face of interpersonal violence. Reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digby_Tatham-Warter carrying an umbrella about the Battle of Arnhem and leading a bayonet charge wearing a bowler hat.

The British Library membership card is fantastic for this. It's almost literally saying "Don't punch me, I'm upper middle class". Given the importance of class signifiers in the whole affray, that moves him perfectly to bystander status. Probably worked better than an actual press card. Or warrant card.

But as he points out, this is an extremely routine conflict, almost as if this is what these people do at the weekends rather than have fights at football matches:

> "Then, I had the sense, it was all just like old times. The saboteur women screamed murderous abuse at the terrier-men while the terrier-men tried to knock video cameras from the women’s hands, there were scuffles and a good deal of debate about who started what, and vicious, well-rehearsed arguments about the bloody business of killing foxes. I wandered around asking if anyone happened to have seen my car keys."

(There is probably a whole other article to be written about the dark whimsy of violence that pervades this article!)

Re: Fantastic Mr. Fox (2005)

#20

Post by dabernathy89 »

spyckie2 wrote: post #5

Wow - this is old journalism at its best. A few things really stand out: - a 36(!!) minute masterpiece, and difficult to cut anything out to make it shorter without losing something - the journalist covered both sides of the story, and did so beautifully, allowing us to enter into his shoes and feel like we were in the action, talking to the people on both sides - both sides were given more than fair treatment to voi…

I think long-form pieces like this are interesting, but I would hardly say it'd be "difficult to cut anything out". There is a ton of fluff here. I certainly don't have time to read the whole thing.
Post reply on HN