Tuesday, 30 November 2021

I Think I'll Drive To Work Today, Mrs Jones... (Nissan Primera)

The immediate aftermath of Peugeot's "Drive of Your Life" ad saw a number of interesting (or utterly banal, depending on your outlook) attempts to replicate the formula, not least from Peugeot themselves. Few of these imitations launched with quite the same degree of grandiose self-indulgence as the Peugeot spot - booking out an entire three minute News at Ten ad break for its debut in February 1996 was a stunt that seemed to turn enough heads while garnering little adulation from the press - but the intrinsic narrative was set in stone. Your everyday journey from Point A to Point B was represented as an opportunity for spiritual cleansing - the time when you got to cast off your established identity and embrace your full aptitude as the kind of liberated soul who drives X vehicle. The idea, I suppose, being that your car was a transitory vessel for moving in between two static poles, your time therein a precious and ephemeral phase in which nothing was fixed and solid and you could momentarily defy definition and simply be an individual riding a wave of unspent potential. The outcome of your diurnal routines were unlikely to change in any substantial way just because you were embarking on them in a flash new set of wheels, a fact that I doubt many consumers were truly unwise to - what auto manufacturers were attempting to sell you (besides the obvious) was a moment, and how to purportedly make the most of it.

This ad for the Nissan Primera feels more modest in tone than its Peugeot counterpart, ditching its more abstract elements (there's no obvious equivalent here to our so-called average person's Nicolas Roeg-drenched fantasies of pursuing a girl in a red coat), although the central energy is much the same. A nondescript businessman's morning commute to work becomes a transcendent ritual in which he gets to revel in his yearning for some kind of higher fulfilment. "Lifted" by Lighthouse Family is used as an analogue to M People (both acts were commonly lumped into what at the time was derisively categorised as "coffee table music"), with the succession of pretty accompanying visuals once again evoking the sensation of watching a truncated music video (on the subject of the actual "Lifted" music video...anyone else consider it slightly curious that it takes place in an arid desert when the lyrics explicitly and repeatedly reference rain?). The grand twist here being that our protagonist works from a home-based office, alongside his wife, meaning that he was out there facing the world just for the hell of it. The Nissan answers a very different need in his life - one which, having been working from home for the better part of two years now, I can certainly comprehend. When, early in 2020, venues that encouraged mass gatherings became forbidden territory and we were all regulated to our own private spaces, the loss of that daily commute came as an unexpected blow; more than just a functional necessity, it provided an opportunity to connect with the outside world and reaffirm that we were all a part of something larger. I know a number of people who were still setting out every morning, if only to immediately turn tail and head back home - if nothing else, it offered alleviation from staring at the same four walls all day. In this guy's case...well, a person could do a lot worse than having to stare at the swanky-looking walls he has around him. But the basic human need is duly recognised.

Viewing this ad in 2021, it's hard not to see it through the lens of the post-COVID world, in that the great outside the hero traverses seems puzzlingly deserted. You do see the silhouettes of what looks like a trio of cyclists as he first sets out on his journey, but otherwise he's got the entire road, and the world as a whole, entirely to himself. Even when he reaches the city, which we might initially assume to be his stopping point, there's nary another soul in sight. The brand new morning looks fresh as a daisy, golden and picturesque, but there's something very eerie, even borderline post-apocalyptic about the conspicuous lack of life stirring therein. The obvious answer is that the outside world exists here purely for the benefit of our protagonist; when he heads out for his symbolic commute, he isn't so much escaping his self-contained bubble as wallowing in an extension of it. The bigger picture is, for all intents and purposes, his own private and personalised backyard, with no other humans with their own intersecting agendas there to smudge up his pristine view.

Still, what really intrigues (and unnerves) me about this spot is how the couple therein play like worldlier counterparts to our minimalist chums who, at around the same point in advertising history, were down in their spartan lair, struggling to come to terms with their shameful addiction to Imperial Leather. Again, same energy. This couple, in direct contrast, have an unashamed hankering for luxuries, but the world they inhabit seems every bit as jarringly surreal, cut off from anything resembling conventional civilisation and steeped in a mind-bending artificiality. As the ad opens, and we find our leads contemplating the day ahead from the comfort of their ultramodern bedroom, their reflections are fleetingly glimpsed amid the bizarrely fluid purple mise en scene, cluing us in that there is an element of duality at play. Like those minimalists, they speak to one another in a stilted manner that suggests both are playing up to their assumed roles; visually, there is enough of a contrast between the couple's casual and working environs, even if they are apparently both situated underneath the same roof (one is flamboyant, borderline illusory and something of an eyesore, while the other is ordered and decorous, if no less elaborate), although it is curious that they insist upon the formality of addressing one another as "Mr Jones" and "Mrs Jones" in both modes (thus telegraphing the ad's plot twist at the start). I would hazard a guess this done to facilitate a closing echo, so that the viewer would be crystal clear on the revelation that his wife and his colleague are indeed the same person - and besides, compared to the Imperial Leather couple, I suspect that their repeated insistence on these austere monikers is intended to come off as more playful than sinister (implying that the novelty of being both marital and business partners has yet to wear off for them). The suggestion of artifice does, nevertheless, go along perfectly with the general queasiness of that purple decor; it plays like an illusion, a dream from which our protagonist is required jar himself loose every morning as he eases himself down to Earth, traversing the open and unpopulated road back to reality (and, potentially, on into some other falsehood) in his trusty Nissan. Which Mr Jones and Mrs Jones, if either, represent the "real" people and which are just roles they are obligated to play in between is immaterial - as with the Imperial Leather ad, human relationships are depicted as a drawn-out ritual of gestures and insincerity, with intimacy with the product in question representing a momentary gasp of clarity amid it all. Our protagonist finds his release in an act of ostensible play pretence - that he needs to drive himself to work - by intermittently purging his identity to that of a Nissan driver on his way to somewhere. That he isn't discovering much out there except a mirror to his own wanderlusting ego is likewise immaterial.

Tuesday, 23 November 2021

The World's Most Horrifying Advertising Animals #38: They're Dogs! And They're Playing Poker!


What exactly is the deal with those dogs playing poker anyway?

We're all familiar with the gag in the Simpsons episode "Treehouse of Horror IV", where Homer is so unsettled by Cassius Marcellus Coolidge's demented visions of canine recreation that he's driven to delirium. Like so many perfectly-executed and enduring Simpsons moments, what we're inevitably left with is a case of full-blown cultural hijacking - it's now virtually impossible to lay eyes on Coolidge's works in any other context and not immediately have Homer's hysterical objections bellowing through your skull (much as it's now impossible not to think of Marge's reaction upon seeing another infamous and much-replicated specimen of animal-orientated visual art). In the case of Homer and those poker-playing dogs, there was always one question lurking at the back of my mind that, for a long time, I was never quite able to satisfy - what, precisely, is the joke here? Other than the really obvious gag (one that I'm confident Coolidge was 100% in on) that the entire premise of dogs playing poker is kind of inherently absurd? No question that they are silly paintings, and at least part of the sequence's appeal lies in the incongruity in seeing such silly images evoking such strong reactions - not only does Homer completely lose his marbles over the thing, but Bart, spoofing Rod Serling in Night Gallery, informs us that the original story that would have tied directly into the Coolidge painting had to be scrapped because it was too horrific. And yet the intensity of Homer's shrieking has me oddly convinced that there is an intrinsic evil to be unpicked from the images - so much so that when the same image (a replication of Coolidge's most famous dog painting, A Friend In Need) later resurfaced in "Two Dozen and One Greyhounds", it lends a sinister undercurrent to what would otherwise be a fairly twee sequence of Disneyesque pet courtship. Coolidge's pictures depict a wholly innocuous anthropomorphism - the dogs are behaving like humans, one assumes, for no deeper reason than it making for a cute and amusing visual (compare it to Sir Edwin Landseer's 1840 painting Laying Down The Law, commonly cited as a conceptual forbearer to Coolidge's pictures, which also has naturalistic-looking dogs participating in distinctly human activities, but with a more obviously satirical bent). Homer's visceral reaction to the painting seems to stem from the idea that this kind of lightweight anthropomorphism is, in fact, highly disturbing, as it represents a grotesque subversion on the natural order of things - a point that is later echoed (albeit possibly unintentionally on The Simpsons' part) at the very end of the episode, when Santa's Little Helper engages in what is supposed to be a Snoopy-style jig, but it looks more as though he warrants an urgent visit from Dr Karras.

Still, the effectiveness of the gag is rooted in something quite a bit juicier than Homer detecting evil in an ostensibly dubious source. The Simpsons' was, after all, far from the only cultural voice to send up the works of Coolidge with a fervour that walks a fine line between derision and fascination. The paintings were previously a source of contention between Sam Malone and Diane Chambers in the sitcom Cheers, with the former guilelessly professing to notice something new every time he looked at them. In Larry Shue's 1984 play The Foreigner, a character objects to being put up in a motel room where Coolidge's pictures adorn the walls. In 2002, the Chrysler Museum of Art's idea of an April Fool's prank was to issue a press release claiming that they intended to acquire and exhibit all of the original paintings in their galleries - the mere suggestion that images of dogs playing poker belonged in an institution dedicated to serious art was intended to put you in bawling hysterics not altogether dissimilar to those modelled by Homer. Clearly, there is something about the seemingly harmless gambling mutts that touches a nerve in a lot of people. Coolidge's paintings are an iconic part of Americana, yet America as a whole has a curious love/hate relationship with the images; this much appears to rest on an intuitive consensus that the pictures, while immediately recognisable and highly ubiquitous, are - in total honesty - not actually all that good. They're cute, certainly, but they exude a seedy vulgarity that lets you know, wherever you see one, that you're not in the classiest neck of the woods. Perhaps it's this combination of conceptual fluffiness and visual vulgarity that makes them so successful, and that has enabled Coolidge's dogs to worm their way into so many houses and derelict hotels - there is something undeniably compelling in their unabashed kitschiness. They are, in the words of Jackson Arn of Artsy, "the very definition of a guilty pleasure, the artistic equivalent of a Big Mac and fries." I suspect that this is the real reason why Homer is so terrified by the sight of them - they represent a kind of cultural nightmare, a gleeful celebration of bad taste as it is ceaselessly reproduced and permitted to permeate walls far and wide.

Here's a fun fact about Coolidge's dogs - not only are they horrifying animals, they are Horrifying Advertising Animals, and might even be seen as precursors to the 37 specimens I have covered prior in this series. See, Coolidge didn't create so many images of poker-playing dogs because he found the idea amusing - he had a ulterior motive, in hoping that these wily mutts would charm you into changing your shopping and consumption habits. Coolidge created his original dogs-playing-poker painting, Poker Game, as a stand alone piece in 1984, and might never have revisited the concept had he not later been approached by publishing company Brown & Bigelow in 1903, and commissioned to create sixteen further images as promotional tools for cigars. Not all of the subsequent sixteen show dogs playing poker (some show the dogs at baseball games, ballroom dancing and grappling with a broken-down auto-mobile) but it's the card-handling curs that became the most deeply ingrained in public consciousness. Perhaps it's because these images are the most prominently narrative-driven of the bunch - we get a glimpse into the tensions of the game, and of the underhanded tactics being deployed by the dogs in their tabletop war.

The images have become so iconic in their own right that it was somewhat inevitable that a modern advertising campaign would eventually capitalise on that cultural recognition and appropriate them to their own ends. In the late 1990s, the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network ran a series of promos for their Monday Night Football slot that brought Coolidge's dogs to life, using a combination of real dogs and the wonders of cutting-edge technology. CGI was used to animate the characters' mouths - in case you ever wondered what those dogs actually spoke about in between their poker pursuits (as it turns out, nothing of substance). The premise here was that the dogs got together for their Monday night poker sessions and had televised sports blaring in the backdrop, momentarily commanding their attentions from the cards on the table.

The ESPN promos were directed by Joe Pytka, and were recreated from two particular Coolidge paintings, A Bold Bluff and Waterloo, in which the poker participants are a St Bernard, bulldog, boxer, collie and Great Dane. As with the original images, the main tension at the table appears to be between the St Bernard and the bulldog (who has an instantly familiar voice - has it cropped up previously in our tour of advertising critters, per chance?). The one prominent detail in Coolidge's art that has been omitted from the ESPN promos is that the dogs have all kicked their unhealthy smoking habits. Unsurprisingly so - the dogs might have been designed with the very intention of instilling such habits, but sensibilities had moved on, and contemporary viewers were less likely to be charmed by the sight of a cute dog puffing on a stick of nicotine. The promos got around the big issue these dogs would have come up against, even if they could comprehend the rules of the game - that is, they would never be able to survey their hands with their opposable thumb-less paws - by creating a pair of animatronic paws for each dog. The paws look kind of stiff and jerky, and it's an amusing stretch to entertain them actually being attached to the dogs in question, but any commercial using Coolridge's art as its basis is obviously going to benefit from a little low-rent grotesqueness.

Indeed. It is perhaps also entirely befitting for a campaign lifted from such a notoriously unrepentant slice of low art that the promos have a distinctly ersatz flavour to them. Don't get me wrong, Pytka and his team did a splendid job in recreating the Coolridge originals so lovingly in a three-dimensional world; it is, nevertheless, difficult to watch the ads without being put in mind of the Swamp Gang campaign that was making such waves for Budweiser at the time, and which was built upon much the same formula - wacky talking animals giving their sardonic commentary while the product in question is hawked in the backdrop. The ESPN promos were fun and likeable, but with a whisker less wit and invention than their reptilian/amphibian counterparts down at the bayou. Then again, it's not as though these poker-loving mutts had very much to prove. Their status as a cultural juggernaut was already long cemented; so long as they captured enough of the source's weirdly delectable kitsch, it would be enough to set tails wagging (or curling between your legs, depending on your impressions of said source). Only time will if, come the dawn of the 22nd Century, artefacts from the Swamp Gang are inspiring such farcically mixed emotions in the hearts of onlookers.

Monday, 15 November 2021

Living In The Bottle: Timeless Time (One Foot In The Grave)

Let's talk about another television staple that holds particular fascination for me: the bottle episode. Like our old buddy, the clip show, the budget-friendly nature of the bottle episode has made it a popular go-to across the decades for producers looking to squeeze out an installment or two with as little fuss as possible. The term "bottle episode" was coined by Outer Limits producer Leslie Stevens, who likened the experience of creating such an episode to coaxing a genie out of a bottle - the idea is that you're looking to generate magic from extremely limited resources, with bottle episodes typically restricting their action to a single location and to non-extra cast members (although there are no hard rules about what you can and cannot do). As such, there tends to be something about them that resembles the aura of theatre as much as television, with their slow-burning, minimalist emphasis on enclosed spaces and intensive character dialogues, and there is often tremendous relish to be had in seeing how they rise to the challenge. TV shows of all stripes have tried their hand at the form, and there are certain shows that consist of nothing but bottle episodes (eg: the anthology series Inside No. 9, which was directly inspired by the enjoyment its creators Reece Shearsmith and Steve Pemberton had in making a bottle episode for their preceding series, Psychoville) - I can, however, think of relatively few series that perfected the art of the bottle quite so beautifully and as hauntingly as David Renwick's classic BBC sitcom, One Foot In The Grave.

One Foot In The Grave follows Victor Meldrew (Richard Wilson) a sixtysomething ex-security guard forced into premature retirement (aka redundancy), who now spends his days attempting, entirely in vain, to reassert his value in a society that has callously discarded him, butting heads with just about everyone he encounters and frequently getting the goat of his similarly peevish but more reserved wife Margaret (Annette Crosbie). Other recurring characters include Jean Warboys (Doreen Mantle), Margaret's insufferably scatter-brained best friend, Patrick and Pippa Trench (Angus Deayton and Janine Duvitski), the younger couple next door who seem sadly fated to become Victor and Margaret later in life (giving a healthy shot of irony to the long-running enmity between Victor and Patrick) and Nick Swainey (Owen Brenman), the Meldrews' other neighbour, a deeply eccentric, excessively upbeat charity worker who presents as if he were the bastard love child of Ned Flanders and Norman Bates (and was compared to the latter in the episode "In Luton Airport No One Can Hear You Scream"). The humor blends absurdism (Victor is often the victim of freakishly bad luck) with periodic morbidness - the topic of mortality was an oft-explored one (in fairness, the series title is a dead giveaway), and the series demonstrated just how squeamish it was prepared to get on the matter right from the second episode, "The Big Sleep", when the Meldrews have an emotionally scarring experience at a yoga class. One Foot In The Grave could get very dark in places, to a point that regularly tested the sensibilities of its viewers (my own personal threshold was reached in the episode "We Have Put Her Living In The Tomb", which is the one episode I cannot bring myself to revisit; I do not do dead pets, sorry). A particularly laudable aspect of the series was its willingness to stick to its guns in its thoroughly unsentimental depiction of ageing, relationships and humanity in general (the first Christmas episode, "Who's Listening", being a glaring exception where it surrendered to sentimentality wholesale...on the flip side, you've really got to admire the balls of any sitcom that would exhibit a story as horrific as "The Man Who Blew Away" as festive entertainment).

It's become something of a cliche to point this out when discussing the series, but Victor is a misunderstood protagonist, in that he's often represented in popular consciousness as an unpleasant old man taking knee-jerk umbrage with everyone and everything around him. No question that Victor has a mean temper. But he does not, in all other regards, strike me as a mean person. The thing about Victor is that he's actually quite good-hearted underneath it all. He has a strong sense of justice, and a large deal of his indignation at the general indifference and inconsideration of the world (in his words, "the bloody-minded soddishness of people") is honestly righteous - it's more that he doesn't make life easy for himself with his tendency to leap head-first into confrontations he can never win. On occasions where Victor is excessively cruel (as he was to a bereaved video store clerk in "Who's Listening" and to his brother in "The Broken Reflection") he will end up recognising this and feeling remorse. On top of which, the more closely you watch the series, the more apparent it becomes that Margaret is actually the more bitter and cynical of the two - living with Victor and the perpetual calamity he brings is certainly no picnic, but she's cold to Victor in ways that he does not reciprocate. Then again, Margaret has suffered some pretty appalling misfortunes in her time (and would continue to do so throughout the course of the series) - misfortunes that extend well beyond her marriage to the impossibly accident-prone Victor, and of which the initial bottle episode, "Timeless Time", merely scratches the surface.

One Foot In The Grave debuted on 4th January 1990 and ran for six series, the last of which aired on 20th November 2000 (note: there was a long hiatus between Series 5 and 6, although a number of stand alone Christmas specials appeared in the interim). From Series 2 onward, it became a tradition to have one bottle episode per series, and these were typically written to a formula - they took place in real time, with Victor and Margaret trapped in some kind of unpleasant or claustrophobic situation that, toward the end of the episode, they would reflect on mournfully as an apt metaphor for the trajectory their lives had taken in general (usually foreshadowed in the episode title). Inevitably, the central situation was never resolved, and the episode would fade out with it still continuing. The series liked to mix up this formula - one such episode, "The Trial" of Series 4, dispensed with Margaret altogether and consisted simply of Victor murmuring to himself in his living room for half an hour (it wound up being one of the funniest episodes of the series, too). An advantage of bottle episodes, besides their frugality, is that they allowed for more in-depth character contemplation - with all this dead space to fill, Victor and Margaret were given the opportunity to expand on their backstories in greater detail than a regular episode would have had room for. "Timeless Time", which debuted on 15th November 1990 as the closing episode of Series 2, is notable not only for being the very first of the bottle episodes, but also the only occasion in which the Meldrews openly discuss a personal tragedy from their past that, while never brought up again, inevitably puts a whole new lens on our interpretation of the characters in the present. Not a lot happens in "Timeless Time", and yet it feels like one of the most monumental of all the series.

"Timeless Time" takes place entirely in the Meldrew's bedroom in the early hours of the morning; Victor is suffering from a bout of insomnia (potentially triggered by a bad reaction to the dubious dish of Spaghetti Al Pacino served the previous night at his mother-in-law's), and as an inevitable knock-on effect, so is Margaret. In its sleep-deprived state, Victor's mind begins wandering into all kinds of ludicrous territory, as he attempts to make sense of some of life's most troubling paradoxes - namely, the elusiveness of time, and the inexplicable teaspoon he always discovers while draining the sink after washing up (Victor's fixation on the matter is such that at one point he even drifts off long enough to visualise the Loch Ness Monster as a 60-ft teaspoon). Naturally, "Timeless Time" is a mostly dialogue-driven affair, although it does incorporate some elements of the absurdist slapstick for which the series is well-known - most notably, when Victor is forced to venture outside to turn off his car alarm, loses a slipper and accidentally puts on a semi-decayed hedgehog carcass (I noted that the series could be quite brutal in its treatment of animals, but at least in this instance the hedgehog would have been long out of its misery before Victor got to it; not so much the cat who later has the disintegrating hedgehog dumped on it). Which does make me wonder what kind of cheap and nasty slippers Victor must be accustomed to wearing, if he seriously couldn't tell the difference. "Timeless Time" also contains (I think) the first reference to Ronnie and Mildred, a couple of "friends" of the Meldrew's who would later appear in person (much to the Meldrew's revulsion) in the Series 3 finale, "The Worst Horror of All". Here, it's established that the Meldrews have a stash of unopened Christmas presents from Ronnie and Meldrew in their closet; Victor's boredom reaches such unendurable heights that he seriously contemplates tackling this, but ultimately decides that he hasn't the stomach for it. In the 1996 Christmas special "Starbound" it was revealed that their hoard of unopened gifts has only increased and that, worryingly, one of them has started to smell.

The scenario of "Timeless Time" entails the Meldrews lying still, both literally and figuratively, as time continues to pass them by. With their prospects of a restful night's sleep seeming increasingly doubtful, they're left with only two options - gaze helplessly into the darkened void all around them, or jabber inanely about whatever of life's various annoyances or banalities happen to worm into their fatigued heads. All five of the series' bottle episodes deal, to some capacity, with Victor squaring off against stagnation, but "Timeless Time" may be the entry in which that stagnation is most saliently reflected in his surroundings, with a predominant feeling of nothingness. Nothing, so Victor tells us, is all that exists, before elucidating his theory on why time is merely an illusion - "The future doesn't exist, because it hasn't happened yet. The past doesn't exist, because it's already over. And the present doesn't exist, because as soon as you start to think about it, it's already become the past." Victor's frustrations on the impersonal nature of time, along with his seeming inability to seize the moment and live meaningfully within it, are entirely relatable. And yet what he and Margaret articulate throughout the course of the episode would appear to disprove all of his assertions. Clearly, the past and the future are very existent, as two equally oppressive states between which the Meldrews are perpetually sandwiched. They are haunted by the emotional baggage they have accumulated in their six decades on Earth, and by the inevitability of their own demises - and Victor is troubled to hear that he has already been consigned to the grave, or rather his cremated remains to the floor of Allied Carpets, in the distorted perception of a former acquaintance. Or perhaps it's more a case that Victor and Margaret live in the Eternal Now, the eternity of that now having become more inescapable as time has gone on. From their assorted journeys down memory lane, there are numerous ways in which their present situation seems largely unchanged from its humble beginnings - at one point, they reminisce about the first night on which they ever slept together, which was also defined by its sleeplessness. For Victor, the standout memory of the evening was being kept awake by a dripping tap, while Margaret recalls Victor's bed-hogging inconsideration as the source of her own insomnia (although at the time she had somehow convinced herself that this was all part of the romantic ritual). The paradox at the heart of the episode is how Victor and Margaret have remained trapped in their personal inertia while still feeling the onslaught of the relentless flow of time. Time has taken its toll on themselves and the world that they once knew, just as it has taken its toll on the world in which "Timeless Time" itself takes place (referenced in "Timeless Time" and no longer with us: Stephen Hawking, Mike Hope, Albie Keen, Reg Varney, Allied Carpets). The world may keep on turning, but where have they actually gotten in any of this?

The major revelation occurs toward the end of the episode, when Victor, ranting about the indignities of tabloid journalism, makes some flippant reference to the Biblical slaughter of the innocents ("no British babies believed to be involved") followed by an awkward silence where he realises that he's broached a forbidden subject and has upset Margaret. He apologises for going too far. Margaret responds by admitting that, "I was thinking about him just this morning," and talks about her chance encounter with a man named Michael, who works for an insurance firm and has a daughter just starting at secondary school. She then refers to somebody named Stuart and wonders if he too would have pursed a career in insurance. It's never explicitly stated, but we're given enough information to piece together that Stuart was Victor and Margaret's son, who died as a child. Michael, meanwhile, was the baby of another woman Margaret met in the maternity ward where she gave birth to Stuart; seeing him as an adult decades later has clearly been an eye-opener for her, not just as a further reminder of the unabating passage of time, but because he provides a ghostly mirror to the point in life where Stuart would have been if he had lived.

As noted, the loss of Stuart and the grief with which the Meldrews have lived ever since was never touched on at any other point in the series. The closest we'd previously gotten to addressing the matter of their apparent lack of descendants was slightly earlier in Series 2, in the episode "Who Will Buy?", when Victor rebuffed a door-to-door salesman, whose sales pitch contained a reference to their hypothetical grandchildren, with the rejoinder: "How do you know I've got grandchildren? I might be completely sterile!" Which at the time might have passed as nothing more than your typically churlish Victor-ism, although with this information in mind it's easy to see how the salesman's presumptions might have touched a nerve in him. Surprisingly, Stuart is not brought up in the one episode where some reference to him would have felt entirely pertinent, ie: the 1991 Christmas special "The Man In The Long Black Coat", where Pippa is pregnant but ultimately suffers a miscarriage. From what little we learn in "Timeless Time", it seems that this is a subject the Meldrews prefer generally not to talk about; life has gone on since Stuart and their bereavement is something they've had to accommodate in that, but the rawness of that loss is still every bit as potent, demonstrating how the past is indeed alive and kicking in the present. It is unknown how old Stuart was when died, but Margaret's line, "she was coming out just as I was going in", gives me the ominous feeling that he possibly didn't even make it out of the hospital. It's in Michael and his mother and the wistful feelings they inspire in Margaret that we see another facet of time not factored into Victor's earlier equation - namely, the future that once might have been - and how this too has heavy bearing upon the now. Judging by the tenderness with which Margaret describes her encounter with Michael, the meeting has been of some comfort to her, as if she has glimpsed vicariously, through Michael's entirely prosaic existence, a parallel universe in which Stuart survived to adulthood and the two of them were able to enjoy a relationship that spanned so many touchstones in both of their lives. There is, nevertheless, one element in which his mother's life seems to synch up hauntingly with Margaret's own - Michael will soon be leaving the area, prompting the empathic remark that: "She'll miss him; she never had any others". Life is comprised of meetings and partings at all stages, but perhaps in this statement we also see an indirect acknowledgement of Margaret's own need to come to come to terms with her loss and accept that this outcome never was.

The mention of Stuart segues into a broader discussion about how easy it was for the characters to take life for granted when it seemed that they had all the time in the world. Margaret makes a particularly astute observation when she recalls that, "A year was an eternity when you were a child. The time between one Christmas and the next." In the end, the absent Stuart seems emblematic of the more general sense of thwarted potential that pervades the episode. The central problem of a sleepless night becomes a metaphor for grand life plans that never came to fruition; Victor's frustrated tallying of the number of prospective hours' sleep he still has remaining an acknowledgement of his increasingly limited time on Earth. Meanwhile, the rattle of distant milk bottles that Victor bemoans as "the beginning of the end" is a comical shorthand for the cold hand of death slowly but surely crawling its way toward him. There is something wryly paradoxical in seeing the dawning of a new day, more conventionally interpreted as a symbol of renewal, posited as a prelude to impending oblivion. This duality is emphasised in a visual gag at the end of the episode, when we see the light of dawn through the bedroom window, accompanied by the last of the intrusions they have to deal with from the neighbourhood fauna, a sparrow energetically heralding the new day. Having plumbed the depths of the Meldrews' darkest, most tightly-guarded sorrows, we are apparently being offered our light at the end of the tunnel - Victor is quick to dismiss the sparrow (who has apparently woken him on previous mornings) as yet another in his endless list of daily annoyances, but Margaret suggests that the bird's singing might hold the key to their salvation. And as affecting as that fleeting talk of Stuart is, it's in its final three minutes that I personally feel that "Timeless Time" comes into its poignantly understated own, as Victor and Margaret figure out where to go from here.

The sparrow at the end of "Timeless Time" recalls the titular Darkling Thrush described in Thomas Hardy's 1900 poem (originally titled "By The Century's Deathbed"), in which Hardy relates his apprehension on approaching the end of a cultural era. The narrator of Hardy's poem describes walking through a barren winter landscape, in which most of the natural world appears to reflect his own nihilistic outlook. The song of a solitary thrush provides the sole contradiction, a twitching of life in overwhelming decay, causing the narrator to ponder if perhaps there is a small glimmer of hope that lurks beyond his comprehension:


"So little cause for carolings
      Of such ecstatic sound
Was written on terrestrial things
      Afar or nigh around,
That I could think there trembled through
      His happy good-night air
Some blessed Hope, whereof he knew
      And I was unaware."

 

Like Hardy's thrush, the sparrow sounds out at what the Meldrews presume to be the irrevocable waning of their time, and Margaret shares the narrator's romantic interpretation of the significance of birdsong, as a beacon of hope amid a wasteland of endless despair. Ostensibly, "Timeless Time" might ultimately be perceived as a meditation on finding the courage to face a new day in an ongoing cycle in which monotony, misery and mortality are all so omnipresent. This seems to be the conclusion Margaret points toward when she suggests that the sparrow's life is no less gruelling or humdrum than their own: "All he does is eat burned bits of toast and a few worms...still got plenty to sing about, evidently." It is an observation with which Victor does not disagree. Nevertheless, the episode's fade-out offers a disturbance to this glimmer of optimism, in characteristically sardonic One Foot In The Grave fashion. Margaret chooses this moment to raise with Victor the first of the many (we presume) troubles he can expect to face in the incoming day: "You won't be able to have porridge for breakfast tomorrow. We're out of milk." The dwindling resources in the Meldrews' food larder serves as further indication of the ever-decreasing cache of things they have to look forward to in life, but Victor isn't quite willing to throw in the towel. He insists that he'll settle for the powdered milk they had previously discussed receiving as a free sample, whereupon Margaret drops her final bombshell: "We're also out of porridge." Victor then proposes that he might try worms on toast "for a change", having previously ruminated on whether the bird's unpalatable diet was directly responsible for its morning enthusiasm - this, though, registers less as a resolve to find a brand new outlook on life than it does a grudging resignation to his miserable lot; in his own bitterly sarcastic way, Victor conveys a Zen-like acceptance for the drudgery that undoubtedly lies ahead. "We'll open a new can in the morning," says Margaret stoically. "Yes," Victor murmurs, "We always seem to...", and the episode ends. 

The final punchline of the episode is a play on the idiom "to open a can of worms", meaning to create a whole new set of problems in attempting to solve an existing one; a closing expression of pessimism that naturally tempers whatever willingness the Meldrews might have displayed in bracing themselves for the imminent new day. Rattle of distant milk bottles aside, the new morning brings not oblivion, but a continuation of their daily routine, and the need to go out and engage with what Victor had only just described as pure ritual. The real horrors that Victor anticipates, however, are to be located in life's unpredictabilities - the assortment of opportunities for things to go spectacularly wrong as he and Margaret attempt to make the most of their ostensible new beginning. The quest for variety, and the possibility of a fresh start, so "Timeless Time" tells us, is all worms. And it makes for one heck of an unappetising breakfast on burned toast.