Tagged Mr Tumble

Children’s TV: I Have Some Questions

children-403582_1920 So, I now see rather a lot of children’s television, and I have some questions. 21 to be exact.

 
Peppa Pig
1. Why would Mummy Pig climb a blackberry bush? Who climbs blackberry bushes?

2. Will children be more upset when they discover Father Christmas is not real, or when they discover what would really have happened to Pedro Pony when he broke his leg?

3. Why are everyone’s eyes on the same side of their heads? More importantly, what is on the other side?

CBeebies
4. Why do the CBeebies presenters have a baby?

5. Where did the CBeebies presenters get a baby from?

6. Do the authorities know the CBeebies presenters have a baby?

7. Where do the CBeebies presenters keep the baby?

8. Does the CBeebies baby like it in her drawer?

Topsy and Tim
9. Why didn’t Topsy and Tim retain its original title, Village of the Damned 2: The Midwich Cuckoos Bred?

Baby Jake
10. Why don’t Baby Jake’s family have some kind of child safe window guards or latches, given that they live in a windmill (and seem to spend an inordinate amount of time encouraging a multitude of children to lean out of the windows)? What kind of a safety message is this sending out to all the other ten children families living in windmills?

11. Why do Baby Jake’s family live in a windmill?

Mr Bloom
12. How is Mr Bloom ‘all about and everywhere’? Is Mr Bloom a god?* Father Christmas?

(*Please note, this is rhetorical. I do not want to hear personal views on the whether Mr Bloom is a god, as I find it upsetting.)

 
Woolly and Tig
13. Does anyone ever wash Woolly? Apparently, the average cuddly toy, engaging in average cuddly toy activities, is filthy and full of bacteria. I can only assume Woolly is probably carrying bubonic plague by now.

Waybuloos
14. Why? That is all.

In the Night Garden
15. Why do the Tombliboos trousers matches their arses?

16. Why do the Tombliboos bother to wear trousers?

17. Why don’t the Tombliboos lend their pointless trousers too Upsy Daisy, who can’t keep her dress down?

18. Why do the Ninky Nonk and the Pinky Ponk randomly change size? I was going to say it’s like being in a dream. That may be why. Scratch this one.

19. Who thought Makka Pakka was a good idea for a name in a programme aimed at children who are just learning to talk and prone to mispronunciation?

20. I know people have asked before, but is Iggle Piggle dead?

Mr Tumble
21. Why did nobody question whether having Mr Tumble ask children to look for his ‘three special things’ was the best way to phrase it?

 
 

(Please note: there are, of course, so many questions about Sarah and Duck, but I have covered these before. In some detail. I have therefore decided not to fall down that particular rabbit hole again. Too stressful…Wandering about with a duck, I ask you…No. Must stop.)

Clock: The Ten Funniest Things The Toddler Said Last Week

It’s time for the Ten Funniest Things feature. The Toddler will take a break from evil cackles (‘ha’) and concerns about what on earth is wrong with boys (many have wondered), to present her thoughts:

1. On pot
The Toddler is sitting next to Silly Daddy. She suddenly declares, ‘Daddy, I’ve got pot.’ Silly Daddy is half way through gathering up bags of crisps and chocolate when it transpires that The Toddler has a spot on her leg.

2. On searching, minimal effort
Silly Mummy has asked The Toddler to look for a missing toy. The Toddler does precisely no looking before declaring: ‘I can’t find it anywhere!’
Silly Mummy points out: ‘You haven’t looked!’
The Toddler bucks up her ideas, and carefully inspects the 10cm square patch of empty floor right at her feet: ‘It’s not there, is it?’ Thanks for your help, The Toddler.

3. On clocks, with an ‘l’
The Silly Family are going swimming. Silly Daddy is getting tickets. The Toddler has spotted something she wants Silly Daddy to see: ‘Look, Daddy, a clock!’ Except she’s not yelling ‘clock’. She never says ‘clock’. She always misses the ‘l’. Usually, the context makes her meaning clear. Usually, she can only mean ‘clock’. But this is the swimming pool, no assumptions should be made. A quick check of surroundings is warranted. Everyone is dressed. There is a clock on the wall. All is well.

4. On bags, naughty
The Baby is waving around The Toddler’s spotty Mr Tumble bag. Inevitably, she hits herself in the face. The Toddler takes charge of the situation. By marching over to the bag and saying firmly, ‘Bad bag!’

5. On butterflies, identity issues
The Toddler wants to wear one of her dresses (every day). Silly Mummy offers choices: ‘Pink dress or butterfly dress?’
The Toddler knows her answer: ‘Butterfly dress. It’s got big small ladybirds on it.’ Ah, yes, the ladybirds. Also called butterflies. Silly Mummy wonders why The Toddler thinks we call the dress the ‘butterfly dress’.

6. On evil cackles, ha
The Toddler is quite taken with the evil queen in Enchanted: ‘Can we see evil queen now?’
Silly Mummy replies, ‘Yes she’ll be on in a minute. Does she say “mwah ha ha”?’
‘Yes, she does say “ha”! Ha!’ The Toddler may need to work on her evil cackle.

7. On that poor boy
The Toddler has found a new way of showing Silly Mummy up in public. This one’s subtle. She’s doing it with concern. Silly Mummy, The Toddler and The Baby are in town, and pass a lady who has stopped to feed her crying baby. The Toddler breaks free and runs back to the lady and baby. She stops right in front of them, and loudly says, ‘That poor boy! What’s wrong with the boy, Mummy?’ The Toddler thinks she is being caring. She does not realise she is effectively in some poor woman’s face yelling, ‘Call yourself a mother? Your poor baby is crying! Crying!’ (In a connected matter, there is a boy a little older than The Toddler who lives next door. He has quite a lot of tantrums. Whenever The Toddler can hear him through the walls, she asks, ‘What’s wrong with the boy, Mummy?’ Unfortunately, if we bump into them on the street now, regardless of the fact that the boy is not doing anything & is minding his own business, The Toddler will spurn all traditional forms of greeting and loudly ask, ‘What’s wrong with the boy, Mummy?’)

8. On overreaction
The baby has hit The Toddler on the head with a soft toy. Fortunately, The Toddler is not one to overreact: ‘The Baby has broken my head!’

9. On watches, Grandma’s
The Toddler has commandeered Grandma’s watch. She holds it out to Silly Mummy: ‘I want to wear my clock on!’ (She’s not saying ‘clock’. She means clock. She’s not saying clock. See number 3.)
Silly Mummy stops giggling (she’s not saying clock), and deals with the matter in hand: ‘That’s not your clock, is it? That’s Grandma’s.’
‘Yes it is my clock! Not Grandma’s clock. It’s my clock.’ (Not saying clock. Insert your own immature giggling here.)
‘Where did you get it?’
‘It’s Grandma’s.’

10. On the park, for childrens
The Toddler is at the park. Silly Mummy suggests she has a go on the balance bar. The Toddler disagrees: ‘No. It’s for childrens.’ It is unclear what The Toddler thinks she is exactly (apart from not getting on the balance bar, of course).

Some other posts in the ‘Ten Funniest Things The Toddler Said Last Week’ feature
Week 5: Don’t Do It
Week 7: Calm Down
Week 15: We Are Not a Stinker
Week 18: A Spinny Armpits

Muppet Babies v Sarah and Duck

I’m conducting a comparative study of children’s TV programmes in the eighties and children’s TV programmes today. Impressive, non? Non. It’s a posh way of saying I’m trying to decide whether the children’s TV I watched was more or less utterly ridiculous than that which The Toddler now watches. In order to answer this all important question, I am comparing Muppet Babies with Sarah and Duck in five scientific* categories. Each of these categories has been meticulously formulated** to assess the relative levels of ridiculousness between these two shows. Once the outcomes of the five categories are combined, I will be in possession of clear, indisputable evidence conclusively proving*** which generation watched the more ridiculous TV Programmes.

(*Stupid. **Not at all. I made them up on a whim. ***Not even slightly.)

 
Category 1: Random Animals

Sarah’s best friend is a duck. Due to the complete absence of parents/guardians/responsible adults around to set her right (see below), she appears to believe this is normal.

Of course, at least half of the Muppet Babies were random animals and, frankly, who on earth knows what the rest of them were.

Still, ill-advised as it may be to put a baby bear and a baby pig in the same nursery, Sarah takes a duck to the library. And the doctors. We all know the saying. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck…it is not suitable company for a child at the doctors. Because it’s a duck.

Sarah and Duck is the most ridiculous programme in the random animals category.

Category 2: Random Animals Aside, What on Earth is Going on with the Characters?

Okay, so The Muppets, as babies or otherwise, have always been a little on the weird side.

However, let us just take a moment to consider a few of the characters featured in Sarah and Duck: a seven year old girl; a duck; a rainbow; a wool wrapped lady with a talking bag; a talking bag; a donkey; a cake; a flamingo; a girl with a plate; an umbrella that is scared of rain; and some shallots.

I think we can all agree no more needs to be said. Sarah and Duck is the clear winner here, too.

Category 3: Parents and Guardians

The whereabouts of the Muppet Babies’ parents was never addressed. However, the Muppet Babies were being cared for by Nanny. Nanny had her weaknesses. She was just a torso and a pair of legs. That seemed a little odd. Mary Poppins would certainly have frowned upon that sort of thing in the nannying world. But, in all fairness to that torso, it was there for those muppet kids. It was a torso and a pair of legs more than is supervising Sarah and that duck.

Yes, Sarah and Duck are wandering around town without a single parent or guardian in sight. To make matters worse, the one adult who appears at all is Scarf Lady. Hardly the epitome of a responsible adult. She’s called Scarf Lady; has a pet donkey; and her talking knitting bag helps her when she gets confused. Though evidently not when she got confused and thought a donkey was an appropriate pet.

Sarah and Duck is once again most ridiculous.

Category 4: Stupid Names

Sarah and Duck has Scarf Lady, Ribbon Sisters, Plate Girl, Scooter Boy. Yes, you don’t want to be called Plate when you have to go to school (not that anyone in this programme has any parents to send them to school) but, to be fair, these names are accurate descriptions. It therefore just doesn’t seem quite justified to call them stupid names. Stupid characters, perhaps. But with pertinent names.

Over to Muppet Babies: Fozzie, Rowlf, Gonzo, Animal, Beaker.

Muppet Babies takes this one.

(Interestingly, both programmes have a Scooter. Scooter is a cross-generational daft name.)

Category 5: Plot (or What Are They Doing?)

The Muppet Babies lived in a nursery and went on imaginary adventures, with songs, before returning to Nanny and reality. They played hide and seek, tried to cure fear of the dark, performed Snow White, and avoided the dentist. Actually, this is all relatively normal behaviour for young children (or young whatever they were).

Sarah and Duck also go on adventures. Not imaginary. Surreal, but not imaginary. They go to the zoo because Duck wants to be a penguin (of course he does). They photograph birds (yes, that’s a duck photographing birds). They learn to bobsleigh (Cool Runnings 2: The Child and The Duck). Their bus gets diverted and makes some underwater stops. They make soufflĂ© (a seven year old and a duck, weirdest Come Dine with Me ever). Imaginative? Yes. Different? Yes. Ridiculous? Absolutely.

Obviously, Sarah and Duck wins in this category.

 
 
By four categories to one, children’s programmes of today are declared more ridiculous than those of the eighties. So, there you have it. Children of the eighties may have believed nannies didn’t have heads, and to this day think the word ‘beaker’ is hilarious, but at least we weren’t asking our parents for pet ducks. Or, indeed, ignoring the very existence of any such thing as a parent, and making a soufflĂ© with a small aquatic bird of the anatidae family (i.e. a duck).

 
Tune in next week for the epic smack down that is Rentaghost v Mr Tumble.*

(*This is not happening. Do not buy foam fingers.)