Talk:Alan Clark

Notorious appearance on BBC Question Time where as a govt minister he criticised govt policy
I can't believe that this isn't here already, since I thought it was one of the things he was most famous for in politics.

He was on BBC Question Time as the official govt representative (Thatcher was PM). He dept concerned arms policy and he was asked a question about it, and he criticised the govt policy!

It led to the (somewhat astonished) presenter Robin Day turning to the audience and saying;

"Does anyone want to support the Prime Minister on this issue, given that her own minister doesn't want to?"

Confirmed here - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/8259469.stm

(I'm fairly certain that no govt minister on the show has acted like that before or since - as I say seemingly making him quite famous for it). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.210.174 (talk) 11:16, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Bongo bongo land?
Does anyone have a reference for the existence of this place? The article claims that it exists as a region in Africa. I would imagine that this is not true. MalachiK (talk) 17:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MalachiK (talk • contribs) 17:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Text removed by MalachiK:-
 * "However, many were forced to retract their criticisms after it emerged that "Bongo Bongo Land" was actually the name of a region of Sub-Saharan Africa, a fact Clark discovered while on safari with Kenneth Williams". Copied to talk page by Motmit (talk) 23:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

On reflection, it does seem rather unlikely that a Tory minister would be on safari with Kenneth Williams in, ahem, Bongo Bongo land. Wouldn't you say? MalachiK (talk) 21:27, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Bongo (Grand-Bassam) is a place in Africa. "Glyn" Williams was Clark's private secretary and in 1989 they were at least in Tunisia. So there may be some truth in a distorted story, but not sufficient for a reference. Motmit (talk) 21:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Classic!--80.0.46.212 (talk) 19:18, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Lead
Motmit, rather than reverting quite a lot of work, can you say here what the issue is? These are the things that he was best known for, according to secondary sources. The lead you reverted to is very poor. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 19:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok the original lead was bad, but the replacement was overlong and concentrated mainly on the diaries. I have tried to summarise the totality of his career and reorganised a section which was out of order and muddled - would welcome development. Regards Motmit (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The replacement did not focus on his diaries; it was one just sentence, I think. Please see WP:LEAD. It must contain known controversies. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 20:08, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * If you think the detail is "selective," which details do think should be added to make it non-selective? Also, please bear in mind that leads should be well-written. The others you are suggesting are very spartan. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 20:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * In your ref wp:lead, I note the words "short independent summary" - hence one sentence. Two additional paragraphs you added are not short, and the text you have introduced is not a summary but a whole load of detail which belongs in the body. The lead I proposed summarised controversy over his historical writing, controversy over his views and the embarrassments of his political activities, as well as the material in the diaries. (in one sentence) You also reverted my attempts to sort out the muddle in the politics paragraph. Lets not get into controversy ourselves. Regards Motmit (talk) 20:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know what you mean about one sentence. Leads should be able to stand alone as a summary of the topic, and should be between one and four paragraphs, depending on the length of the article. Your lead didn't say anything. There is no point in hinting at things, but leaving out the meat.


 * Your main complaint is that it is selective. Therefore, please say which details you'd like to see added to make it less so. I will happily add them. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 20:22, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * You are simply not reading me - I shall waste no more time.Motmit (talk) 20:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Writing
Motmit, the way you're editing is leading to very poor writing. Sticking the Kenneth Clark comment after the description of Clark losing focus is really inappropriate. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 05:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Philosophy
Is it possible to take seriously someone who book selection on Desert Island Disks was Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy. I think the answer is no. Stikko (talk) 11:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The trouble is too many people did take him seriously when he was clearly taking them for a ride - viz Pilger. However you are probably after the wrong fox with Russell's work. Motmit (talk) 18:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Russell's History of Western Philosophy is actually a very enjoyable read, but not something one should take wholly seriously--consider Russell's view of Kant, for example. But if one were shipwrecked on a desert island, serious study of philosophy wouldn't be one's main (please excuse the feeble pun) concern.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.60.77 (talk) 15:04, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Lions led by donkeys
Made a small change to the section as it seems clear that it is the dialogue that Clark admitted to having invented rather than the phrase itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.147.24.224 (talk) 12:52, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh! What A Lovely War
As part of the team behind the film (I located some of the uniforms) I refute the suggestion the piece was inspired uniquely by this book. It was far more inspired by the revulsion caused by the persistent militarism in the wake of WWII, which thought that they and they alone were right, and by the simple statistics of the War. It was generated in a study Workshop, and matured under the guidance of Charles Chilton, who never knew his father, killed in the War. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.173.156 (talk) 12:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Agreed. In the article on Oh, What A Lovely War!, it says that some scenes were taken from Clark's book The Donkeys (without crediting him), and he sued and got credited. Neither claim is cited; I'm deleting this claim, which is quite at odds with the much more detailed explanation of how the musical was inspired and developed in the other article. MrDemeanour (talk) 10:13, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

NOT Alan Clark's Diaries
There is no mention of "Not Alan Clark's Diaries" by Peter Bradshaw. I don't know enough to write up an entry for it. Can somebody who knows please do this? Thank you.

Gentlemen's clubs that Clark belonged to
Peter Bradshaw intimated in his spoof columns of Clark's Diaries that Clark was a member of White's and Pratt's. Can anybody confirm this and put it in Clark's main article? Also, was he a member of any of other clubs? Thanks in advance to anybody who knows.

Alan Clark Diaries
I've merged in the article that was at Alan Clark Diaries, done some light edits, and removed a large block-quoted section that had sourcing problems. The diaries themselves are notable but the article on them was entirely unsourced; I'm hoping this topic can get better attention as part of this article instead. If the section ends up becoming far too long or WP:UNDUE, we can spin it back out again. -- asilvering (talk) 21:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC)