Opinion: The problem with QI…

QI

QI’s one of the few subjects that I can speak about with some authority. Not only have I seen every episode, but I also edit the British Comedy Guide entry for the show, which consists of going through every episode (both normal and XL versions) with a fine tooth comb and reporting every single interesting thing I can find.

Not only that, but I’ve read every single QI book, possess an actual script from the show, and I’ve even corrected the show when it’s made mistakes (yes, QI gets things wrong). For that, the researchers honoured me with an  “I’ve outsmarted the QI Elves” badge. I know so much about QI that, ironically, I’m worried I might bore people to death with my knowledge of it…

During this current series however, people have been complaining about a decline in quality. Is it getting worse? Has there been too many changes to the show? What’s gone wrong?

For me, it’s not the questions, guests, format, scheduling, factual errors or anything like that. It’s the fans who keep on complaining about these supposed changes. If you’re reading this and you’re thinking of complaining about what I’m saying, then you are part of my issue.

Reading the QI forums and other comedy sites, there seems to be two rival groups of fans. There’s the group who believe that the main purpose of QI’s to be funny. They believe it’s at heart a comedy and that it should try and make you laugh as much as possible. Let’s call these people “Humorists”. Then the other group, who think that QI’s main purpose is to be interesting and educational. They want it to stand out from the other shows in terms of intellectual material and make you think. Let’s call them “Educators”.

The problem’s that it’s almost impossible to please both groups. If something pleases the humorists then the educators are likely to say that it’s proof QI’s dumbing down. If the educators like something then the humorists will complain that QI’s not entertaining enough. No-one can agree what the problem exactly is and getting the balance right seems almost impossible.

As far as I can tell, fans have been complaining since the early days of the series. The most obvious complaints were about the choice of panellists, and this still ignites anger. The humorists complain that guests are unfunny, while the educators will say that other guests aren’t being interesting enough. Some might say they’re bringing the tone down.

For example, in the first episode of the current series there was a long section in which the panel (Victoria Coren, Jimmy Carr and Bill Bailey) talked about the shape and appearance of birds. The technical term for this is “jizz” (or at least pronounced “jizz”). Not surprisingly this lead to a load, some would say a torrent, of jokes about the ruder sort of jizz. For some fans this was too much. One even said that they would so disgusted by it they would stop watching the show. When I read this I thought, “Christ. Yes it was rude, but sometimes sex and swearing can be clever. Ask anyone who’s watched The Thick of It.”

Many of the educators argue that what QI needs are more guests who are more academic, like Prof. Brian Cox, who has been on before and is appearing later in the current series. Others in return say that there’s already a show that caters for their tastes, the radio “spin-off” to QI, The Museum of Curiosity, where two of the three guests are always experts, with the third being a comedian or comic writer, as well as a different comic every series acting as co-host next to permanent host and the creator of QI, John Lloyd (The Professor of Ignorance at the University of Buckingham).

Indeed, experimenting with more expert guests, like Cox or Ben Goldacre, could be a good idea. You could probably only have one expert on per episode, but it would be interesting to see if we could find people who were both clever and funny. The problem though is that if you did do this the humorists would no doubt complain that the show would be less funny because fewer comedians would be on.

The fans are so loyal and protective of QI that even the slightest change gets them going. They complained when in Series D each episode became individually themed. Fans complained when the series moved from a post-watershed BBC Two slot to a pre-watershed BBC One slot, saying it would be dumbed down. Indeed the show jumped back again following this pressure, although the producers always denied any dumbing down.

Some have said the questions aren’t as hard, interesting or funny as they used to be. I think the issue here’s that people have been watching QI for so long they know what to expect in terms of possible answers and penalties, so they’re no longer surprised. You have no idea how a question is going to make people react until they hear it.

Most recently QI dropped the “General Ignorance” round to much concern and I must confess I was one of those people. The reason for the removal of the round was that the panel were getting too wise to the questions and were avoiding the klaxon answers, so now these questions are placed randomly throughout each episode. After a while you get used to it, and the experiments, known as the “Jolly Japes” at the end of each episode in this series have been fun. But people have complained about dropping the final quote Stephen Fry usually gave at the end of the programme. Having said that, many people – me among them – have complained about the way Fry wastes up about half-a-minute to introduce each episode; and 10 seconds just to say “Good”.

Many of these complaints are petty, and as you might have gathered I’m guilty of this as well. However, the main complaints – and the most annoying ones – are about when QI gets things wrong.

As mentioned at the start, I’ve corrected things on QI before, and complained on their “Qibble Blog” (that’s the spelling they use) – which is something anyone can do. Personally, I’m rather proud to have corrected the show. For me it’s like a good crime story. You spot the clues, piece together the evidence, challenge the perpetrator and get the credit. Fry once said that the Arc de Triomphe was the largest triumphal arch in the word; after some research, I discovered and successfully challenged them after finding out the largest triumphal arch is in Pyongyang, North Korea. So, the good news is that I proved a point, but the bad news is that QI has offended the most totalitarian state in the world.

The show’s always made errors and often gets complains on various issues (e.g. the Welsh word for “Blue”, the triple point of water etc). Sometimes these errors are mentioned in QI and panellists get rewarded and penalised retrospectively. The problem’s when the complaints get so angry that they’re almost violently vitriolic in their hatred.

The most recent example was when Fry said that he could do something that no-one else in the history of the world has done before: shuffle a deck of cards into a unique order. The reason for this is that the number of possible combinations the 52 cards could be in so huge that you can confidentially say that shuffling a deck of cards in the exact same order twice is impossible.

This statement however unleashed a pedantic floodgate, with people typing, or as I imagine them, hitting the keys of their keyboards in sheer hate, bellowing out what they were typing at the same time, all in unison on various websites the words: “It’s not impossible, it’s improbable!!! You can still get all the cards in the same order again, it’s just very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very unlikely! There’s a difference!”

The response from fans was a total over-reaction. OK, so Stephen said “impossible” instead of “improbable” – just get over it! It’s not the end of the world, it’s just a mistake.

So, what can be done to try and please everyone? One idea’s that QI should have “a year off” because it’s on so often, not just on the BBC but on Dave as well. I’d disagree with that. One of my jobs at the British Comedy Guide is maintaining their TV schedule, and I can tell you that QI is not repeated as often as other shows. Next week (Saturday 17th – Friday 23rd November), QI is being repeated 11 times, most of those being extended repeats. In comparison, Only Fools and Horses is being repeated 19 times (on G.O.L.D.), Last of the Summer Wine 42 times (on G.O.L.D. and Yesterday), and My Family 44 times (on G.O.L.D. and Watch).

Some have said that maybe they should replace some of the regulars, including Fry. That’s totally wrong in my view. Admittedly, Stephen was second choice for the show after Michael Palin, but he’s so perfect in the chair you can’t imagine anyone else in it. Well, actually you can, but you just know it would be David Mitchell, and while he would no doubt be a good host he’s already overexposed panel show-wise with his work on Would I Lie To You? and hosting what some argue to be QI’s sister show The Unbelievable Truth. If he ended up doing both programmes he’d be dangerously close to monopolising the whole thing.

So, what’s the solution? The problem’s that I don’t know, and if I did come up with a plan someone would complain about it. The important thing’s that I know that I don’t know what the answer is. We’re all ignorant. Luckily QI is trying to make the world less ignorant while being funny at the same time. It might not be perfect, but nothing is – although admittedly there’s no such thing as nothing. Let’s just try and keep a level head and not go over the top with our nit-picking.

And for those fans whose blood is still boiling, take a breather, relax, and please don’t complain about me using a sentence beginning with the word “And”, because it’s not a rule of grammar. Just start reading the Bible – the creation story is full of sentences beginning with “And”. And I think you’ll find that’s quite interesting.