Discussing the statement “celebrities seduce, guide, inspire and disgust us” in relation to Jeremy Clarkson

---

Jeremy Clarkson on his farm (Hilton, 2024)

---

In the second season of Amazon Prime’s Clarkson’s Farm (Gavin Whitehead, 2021- ), a show where eponymous Jeremy Clarkson attempts to run a successful farm despite no prior knowledge, the divide in opinions towards the TV presenter becomes very apparent. While striving to obtain planning permission from the council for an on-site restaurant, which proves futile at every encounter, Clarkson and his team discuss that, despite the legal forms appearing correct and with no foreseeable issue to the building’s construction, the main reason for the council’s objection is due to distaste towards Clarkson himself by the committee and the locals. The presenter is both admired by fans, and hated by opposers, both for a multitude of reasons. With a history spanning three decades, containing some of the most iconic British TV shows and multiple controversies, the television presenter and journalist is a very divisive individual in the public’s view. As Ellis Cashmore stated: ‘celebrity culture [is] a prism through which we look at the world, the angle from which we look affecting the image we see’ (2006: 162). Therefore, using this metaphor, it becomes apparent that celebrities can be viewed differently by different audiences, whether that be seduction, admiration, disgust, or inspiration. Jeremy Clarkson is no different. However, his celebrity image extends further than just a baseline love or hate, and his manipulation of his persona and his backlash has assisted a career built on divisiveness.

Seduce and Guide: The Educational and Entertainment Appeal

Jeremy Clarkson’s star image and qualities have remained consistent over his 30-year career. Using Rojek’s forms, Clarkson is an ‘achieved celebrity’ as he has ‘perceived accomplishments [and] possess rare talent or skills’ (2001: 11). This is through his knowledge on motoring, both theoretically and practically, and his wit, shown when he was a presenter on Top Gear between 1988 and 1998. This was a BBC motoring show aiming to give consumer advice about automobiles. This knowledge and wit are key components in his star image within promotion (defined by Dyer as texts ‘produced as part of deliberate creation/manufacture of a particular image’ (1979: 60)). Clarkson’s image from the start has been that of someone who isn’t afraid to be outspoken, laddish, and humorous, which was very different from the more well-mannered, particular, and sophisticated presenters the BBC used on their factual programmes. However, it was this contrast that interested producer Jon Bentley, who stated Clarkson “was opinionated and irreverent, rather than respectfully po-faced. The fact that he looked and sounded exactly like a twenty-something ex-public schoolboy didn't matter. Nor did the impression there was a hint of school bully about him” (Parkinson, 2015). This childish and fun demeanour made him unique and noticeable in the factual presenting landscape, making him a favourite amongst fans and producers, despite the “bullyish” persona being imposing, rude, and off-putting to some.

As the show and his career progressed, Clarkson’s image developed further from the other presenters. As Parkinson states: ‘he became more relaxed and outspoken and he changed his appearance, going from wearing blazer, tie and chinos to his now signature outfit of jeans and casual jacket’ (2015). This further distinguished the divide between him and the upper middle-class stereotypical BBC presenter. As Dyer remarks: ‘stars can be seen as ordinary people who live more expensively that the rest of us but are not essentially transformed by this’ (1979: 43). Clarkson, even with his obvious wealth through several expensive cars and owning his own farm, still tried to maintain this idea that he is just an average bloke who is only famous because he is entertaining and enjoys that, not because he wants to be famous or rich. This allows audiences to relate to him on a personal level.

However, his other main traits in his image are the opposite; over-zealousness and stupidity used for comedic effect. Dyer discussed the notion of the ‘vehicle’ whereby texts are ‘built around star images […] to preserve [and] develop them’ (1979: 62). This was the case in the revival of Top Gear in 2002, in which Clarkson was a major influence in its development, as well as being the main presenter. Therefore, as the show was co-created and starred him, it purposefully highlighted his over-confidence and comedy, along with his knowledge, to focus more on Clarkson as an entertainment personality rather than a standardised information presenter. Despite still containing the consumer advice, this was often tested in a ridiculous manner, and featured more stunts, celebrities, and fast-paced editing to further the engagement through enjoyment. The success of the relaunched Top Gear, in which Clarkson presented from 2002 to 2015, cemented his star image and this persona has persisted to his other media texts.

Clarkson’s ability to seduce can also be noted in his interactions with other celebrities. Robert Van Krieken believes this is an important aspect of celebrity image. He stated: ‘There is also an associative element to celebrity, like any other type of status – the pursuit of status is enhanced through association with higher-status individuals, and a one’s own celebrity can often be enhanced through association with higher-profile celebrities’ (2012: 67). Clarkson has had many interactions with other celebrities. This includes when he hosted his own talk show with celebrity guests (entitled Clarkson, between 1998 to 2000), his participation in panel shows (such as Have I Got News for You, QI, and Never Mind the Buzzcocks), and the numerous encounters with guests on Top Gear, specifically for the “Star in a Reasonable Priced Car” segments. This would involve having a guest interviewed by Clarkson, and then be shown a recording of them setting a lap time on their test track to be added to the leader board. Due to the popularity of this segment for celebrities, evident by the number of high-status celebrities who wanted to participate, it is likely Clarkson’s celebrity status was bolstered by this inclusion. However, arguably more beneficial was the connections made to his Top Gear co-stars: Richard Hammond and James May. Van Krieken also explains that whereas celebrity is awarded to individuals, ‘status is generally seen as attaching to groups’ (2012: 67). This is important as the trio became iconic as a group, launching them and the show to cult status. Despite all having careers and solo projects (Hammond also presented Brainiac: Science Abuse and Total Wipeout, and May presented James May’s Toy Stories), their most notable roles were in Top Gear as a trio. The comedic dynamic between them is often cited as an important factor in the show’s success, and their talent and star power as entertainment presenters became a valuable commodity. This is evident as, following Clarkson’s dismissal from the BBC in 2015 (due to punching producer Oisin Tymon), Hammond and May both quit the BBC to remain as a trio. This led to a creation of a new motoring show on Amazon Prime called The Grand Tour, where the trio had more creative control. This is further emphasised as Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, stated that the trio were “worth a lot and they know it” (Quinn, 2015) justifying the expensive cost of the new show. Without the status of the trio, the new Top Gear presenters in 2016 (Chris Evans, Matt LeBlanc, Eddie Jordan, Chris Harris, Sabine Schmitz, and Rory Reid) lacked dynamic and audience appeal, resulting in a fall in viewership to the ‘lowest in 13 years’ (Plunkett, 2016). This shows how popular Clarkson was to fans.

Clarkson’s success on Top Gear as well as his other factual shows could also be likened to fame derived from reality TV. Cashmore explained that: ‘Reality television tended to turn its characters’ vices into virtues, so that people who displayed ignorance, dishonesty, or some kind of depravity become praiseworthy’ (2006: 189). Therefore, it could be argued that, due to the mediated nature of Clarkson’s shows adding scripted comedy and action into a factual programme, it is similar to the mediation of real life in reality TV, where things are increased to an extreme. Therefore, what would be perceived as a childish display of ignorance in a normal motoring or farming show, within the context of the entertainment genre and persona, Clarkson’s zealous failures appear endearing. The audiences, through this edited scope, are more likely to view Clarkson with empathy, understanding, and enjoyment, instead of distaste and ridicule.

Disgust: The ‘New Lad’, Banter, and the Numerous Controversies

Of course, despite this, not everyone views Jeremy Clarkson’s vices as positives, many instead dislike the celebrity due to his ignorance, dishonesty, and inappropriate comments. According to Dyer, criticism is used to ‘contribute to the shaping of ‘public opinion’ […] and accounts for both the complexity, contradictoriness and ‘polysemy’ of the star image and also for the capacity of critical opinion to contribute to shifts in careers’ (1979: 63). In this respect, Clarkson’s image has been shaped by his supporters and critics views on him. However, his persona appears unshifted throughout the last three decades.

Jeremy Clarkson’s career became popularised in the 1990s. This era was defined by shifting ideologies around gender roles, and the popularisation of new gender sub-categories. These include the ideals around shifting masculinity, specifically that of the “new man” and its antithesis, the “new lad”. Angela Smith explains: ‘Whilst the new man was characterised by an acceptance of feminism and responsibility in terms of commitment to long-term relationships, the new lad rebels against such responsibilities and is typified by a nostalgic retreat into adolescence’ (2008: 83). Clarkson conforms to this “new lad” ideology. As mentioned, compared to his experienced and reserved counterparts, Clarkson didn’t always accommodate his professional position as a motoring journalist. Furthermore, he typified the adolescent retreat by acted more like a schoolboy bully, applying laddish humour to his persona. Despite this being appealing in the 90s, as time progressed, society altered, and Clarkson became older, the continuation of this ‘new lad’ ideology became disjointed and tiresome.

When Jeremy Clarkson and Andy Wilman relaunched the new version of Top Gear in 2002, they emphasised Clarkson’s persona within it. Smith argues the format ‘mirrors that of (men’s) lifestyle magazines and allows the presenters to reconfigure the programme as a platform on which to perform a version of new laddishness’ (2008: 86). This creates an androcentric perspective on a subject that is already typical of masculinity, that being motoring, with more masculine elements such as stunts and offensive humour, added to further accentuate this dismissal of newer masculine identities. Despite the show being popular heterogeneously in terms of gender, Clarkson’s (and by extension Hammond’s and May’s) persona requires this ‘new lad’ lens to be enjoyed. As Laura Mulvey states: ‘There are three different looks associated with cinema: that of the camera as it records the pro-filmic events, that of the audience as it watches the final product, and that of the characters at each other within the screen illusion’ (1975: 843). This is evident as the editing is usually fast paced, the camera focuses on glorifying cars (and sometimes sexualising women), the audience all react with excitement or laughter, and the characters (in this case Clarkson) interacts with people with this persona. Therefore, Clarkson’s shows demand this ideology, that is not favoured by everyone.

Clarkson’s comedic remarks, being another main part of his laddish persona, often result in backlash. Research by Elkholy and Ahsani states: ‘The hosts of [Top Gear] frequently employ impolite remarks in their jokes and criticize each other and other people/group contemptuously as an effort to keep the audience entertained. This, however, has resulted the show to be very sarcastic and impertinently audacious causing controversies upon many people’ (2023: 109). Clarkson’s jokes, as well as being aimed at guests, are usually at the expense of his co-hosts, mainly insulting Hammond’s working-class background from Birmingham, and May’s poor driving (giving him the nickname “Captain Slow”). Despite the harsh undertones, the direct targets of these remarks are often unaffected, not only as they work with Clarkson thus expect it, but also, as Elkholy and Ahsani explain, due to ‘the Banter Principle [as] they do not feel offended because the impoliteness is understood to be untrue’ (2023: 117-118). This further accentuates the “laddish” nature of Clarkson, as this humour is reminiscent of friends joking while at a pub. However, this has the adverse effect of offending audience members who apply to the demographic being offended. Those, as an example, also from Birmingham, who do not have that personal report with Clarkson, may find his remarks more hurtful than funny. Due to this lack of consideration of the impact, audiences not engaged through the “banter principle” may instead develop an animosity towards the presenter as a result.

However, jokes where the target is a minority cause the largest issues. Jokes about queer identities and other races are some of the most common controversial remarks. For example, the BBC had to apologise in 2011 after Clarkson used stereotypes against Mexicans, stating they were “lazy” and “feckless”, in 2014 complaints were garnered due to leaked cut footage of Clarkson reciting the original version of the “Eeny, Meeny, Miny, Moe” nursery rhyme which features the n-word, and later in 2014, broadcasting rules were broken when Clarkson described a bridge they had built as having a “slope” on it, both in reference to its physical gradient, and as word play using the racial slur for someone from Asia (BBC, 2015). In all these cases, unlike the “friendly banter” primarily at the expense of other celebrities, there is no individual target. Instead, the joke is at the expense of races in general, using slurs and stereotypes. Due to the fact Jeremy Clarkson himself is a white man from a wealthy Western background, this further creates issues with racist comments. Smith states: ‘The use of taboo and swearwords are [pb] a matter of careful socialisation, with men in Western society learning habits of verbal aggression, thereby contributing to the perception that they are strong and powerful’ (2008: 92-93). Therefore, these remarks appear to be malicious, and belittling of other cultures (further proven when he ‘made jokes about Indian clothes, trains and even the country’s history’ (Baird, 2015) during the India Special in 2012). As a result, Clarkson can be regarded as insensitive, spiteful, and ignorant, traits that make him unfavourable in his public image.

Furthermore, Clarkson prejudice remarks are indulged by his ‘new lad’ persona, creating more perceived resentment at minorities, and thus more resentment towards the celebrity. For example, in 2006, Clarkson described a car he disliked as being “a bit ginger beer”, which is rhyming slang for “queer”. As Smith explored regarding this incident: ‘The power of a car is aligned with masculine power, which in turn is allied to heterosexual traditional masculinity. The sexual prowess of a man is thus represented as being reflected in his choice of car’ (2008: 94). This further perpetuates the idea that Clarkson and his shows champion cisgender, heterosexual, laddish behaviour, isolating and offending those that do not fit into his views, thus making him be seen as verbose, rude, and over permissive by such audiences. This means his “casual schoolboy bully” persona does not match his age, society, and position within the 21st century, and that his jokes, despite not always being designed to be harmful, are often uninformed and thus detrimental to others and his own star image.

Inspire: The Use of Controversies and Fans for Personal Benefit

Despite the multitude of controversies and backlash, these have been used to further bolster Clarkson’s career. As Cashmore argues: ‘Such is the nature of celebrity culture: whether the social response is one of condemnation or compassion, repugnance or approval, the subject or subjects typically loom large in the public imagination’ (2006: 142). Due to both the celebrity’s and his programme’s popularity, both within the UK and worldwide, the news around Clarkson’s controversies are often extensively covered. Therefore, more people were aware of it, and thus could make personal inferences based on their view towards whether he should be forgiven or condemned. As a figure who revels in controversy, this is a useful tactic for Clarkson, as his persona dictates that he is a no-nonsense individual who doesn’t care about consequences, often making him more favourable with his supporters.

This is important as for a celebrity such as Clarkson, who often features in topical, weekly shows rather than binge-able entertainment, being disregarded in gaps between programmes (or between networks) may make audiences unbothered to continually watch his content. Cashmore argues: ‘For today’s celebs, the most terrible, vile, awful experience they strive continuously to avoid is being overlooked. Once the media fail to notice a celeb’s presence, their status as a celeb disintegrates. […] The media attention may be for the wrong reasons; but there again, the precise reasons are of secondary importance. Of primary importance is the attention.’ (2006: 148-149). Clarkson often says offensive remarks, sometimes without much conviction. As an example, in December 2022, Clarkson stated in his column in The Sun newspaper that he “hates” Meghan Markle and that she should be “made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, ‘Shame!’ and throw lumps of excrement at her”, an article which has since been removed (Clarkson, 2022). This resulted in IPSO receiving 25,000 complaints (BBC, 2023) and celebrities voicing criticism, including the incumbent Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (Sherwin, 2022). This can be seen as attention-seeking by Clarkson, as hate towards Meghan Markle was common at the time, therefore joining with an extreme view would boost the article. Furthermore, Clarkson’s opinion on Markle appears to reflect what is popular at the time, as in 2018, Clarkson defended Markle using the same Game of Thrones metaphor as an insult on those shaming her at the time (Sharp, 2023). This 180-degree change in views demonstrates a willingness to say controversial things purely for media attention.

However, due to Clarkson’s past personality and current fans, the aftermath of many of his controversies is also controlled effectively. Cashmore dictates that ‘celebrities can often receive a lenient verdict simply because of the esteem they enjoy’ (2006: 157). This is most notable during Clarkson’s dismissal from the BBC, which despite the perceived severity, did not damage his career massively. Following the event of him punching producer Oisim Tymon in March 2015, Clarkson (alongside Hammond, May, and creator and producer Andy Wilman) secured a deal with Amazon Prime by July. The new series (The Grand Tour) was able to be released in autumn of the following year. Not only did this receive better ratings than the new cast of Top Gear who started in the same year, but it provided the creatives with the ability to do what they wanted, as it was an online streaming service compared to a public broadcaster. Wilman stated: “[Amazon will] give us the freedom to make the programs we want” (Barraclough, 2015), not only through increased budget, but fewer restraints. This allowed Clarkson to enact his persona more freely without backlash, a change that benefited the presented, and was welcomed by fans clearly willing to pay for the subscription.

Furthermore, even in the short-term following this event, leniency was applied due to Clarkson’s star power and his fans. As Redmond and Holmes discuss: ‘Stars and celebrities are consumed and appropriated by fans in ways which have a profound effect on their identity, self-image and sense of belonging’ (2007: 4). Following the 2015 incident, Clarkson’s fans can be seen as providing damage control and saving Clarkson’s image. A petition requesting the BBC to have Clarkson’s contract renewed reached 250,000 signatures within a day (BBC, 2015), and became Change.org’s faster growing petition at the time (Dearden, 2015). This is testament to the number of fans that were inspired by Clarkson and wanted him reinstated. Furthermore, this fan-support for Clarkson had the adverse effect for Tymon, who received lots of hate and death threats online. Clarkson also used this to his advantage, stating that: “All I would like to say is I wish people would leave Ois alone, because none of this is his fault” (Selby, 2015). This allowed him to appear as humbler and more apologetic due to the incident. In turn, this provided him more favour in the public image as someone owning up to his mistakes, despite the severity and lack of compassion of the event itself.  This also did not isolate that many fans, as for the most part, the fans were not all taking such extreme measures to belittle Tymon and the BBC. This respect of his fans shows Clarkson’s inspiring persona towards his audience, and the manipulation of it shows his exactitude in his star image.

Conclusion

Overall, Jeremy Clarkson is a very divisive celebrity, as what some audiences find appealing is what others find off-putting. Despite his opposition though, Clarkson remains a popular figure within British culture and globally. Whilst his tenor with Amazon Prime, despite no official confirmation, is unlikely to extend ‘beyond 2024’ (Ravindran, 2023) due to the Meghan Markle incident, Clarkson will maintain his fans and star power, so his career may not be over yet.  In the example given at the start, despite Clarkson’s planning permission for an on-site restaurant being turned down by his opposition, he did eventually find a loophole. A combination of his friends and co-workers, power of his fans, and his own determination and commitment meant he overcame that issue. Over three decades, Jeremy Clarkson has seduced, guided, inspired, and disgusted his audience, but despite the uncertainty in his image, and the uncertainty in his future, what has remained consistent is his admirable ability to revel in controversies, and become one of the most notable British celebrities of the 21st century.

---

Bibliography

Cashmore, Ellis (2006) ‘Celebrity/Culture’, Abingdon, Routledge

Dyer, Richard (1979) ‘Stars’, London, British Film Institute

Elkholy & Ahsani, Nizam (2023) ‘Impoliteness in Jeremy Clarkson’s Humor in the TV Series Top Gear’ Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Culture, Vol 5(1)

Mulvey, Laura (1975) ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’, in Braudy, Leo and Cohen,

Marshall (eds.) (1999) ‘Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings’, New York, Oxford UP

Redmond, Sean and Holmes, Su (2007) ‘Stardom and Celebrity: A Reader’, London, SAGE Publications

Rojek, Chris (2001) ‘Celebrity’, London, Reakiton Books

Smith, Angela (2008) ‘Top Gear as a Bastion of Heterosexual Masculinity’, in Price, Stuart and Ross, Karen (eds.) ‘Popular Media and Communication: Essays on Publics, Practises and Processes’, Cambridge, Cambridge Scholars Press

Van Krieken, Robert (2012) ‘Celebrity Society’, Abingdon: Routledge

Webography

BBC (2015) ‘Top Gear: 350,000 sign petition supporting Jeremy Clarkson’, Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31832698 (DOA: 16th May 2023)

BBC (2023) ‘Jeremy Clarkson says he apologised to Harry and Meghan for Sun column’, Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64288418 (DOA: 16th May 2023)

Baird, Dugald (2015) ‘Top Gear: Jeremy Clarkson’s biggest controversies – in quotes’, The Guardian, Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/25/top-gear-jeremy-clarkson-biggest-controversies-quotes (DOA: 20th May 2023)

Barraclough, Leo (2015) ‘Why Jeremy Clarkson’s ‘Top Gear’ Team Went to Amazon’, Variety, Available at: https://variety.com/2015/tv/global/why-jeremy-clarksons-top-gear-team-went-to-amazon-1201554063/ (DOA: 16th May 2023)

Clarkson, Jeremy (2022) ‘One day, Harold the glove puppet will tell the truth about A Woman Talking B*****ks’, The Sun, Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20221217031028/https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/20782114/harry-meghan-netflix-series-truth/ (DOA: 16th May 2023)

Dearden, Lizzie (2015) ‘Jeremy Clarkson petition ‘BBC Bring Back Clarkson’ is now officially the faster-growing Change.org campaign in history’, The Independent, Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/jeremy-clarkson-suspended-more-people-support-top-gear-petition-than-campaigns-to-end-fgm-and-page-3-10100908.html (DOA: 16th May 2023)

Hilton, Nick (2024) 'Hilarious and honest or boorish and bigoted? Untangling the strange, enduring appeal of Jeremy Clarkson', The Independent, Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/features/jeremy-clarkson-farm-amazon-b2536329.html (DOA: 14th August 2024)

Parkinson, Justin (2015) ‘The Jeremy Clarkson Story’, BBC News, Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-31907458 (DOA: 15th May 2023)

Plunkett, John (2016) ‘Top Gear: viewing figures fall to new low’, The Guardian, Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/jun/13/top-gear-viewing-figures-fall-to-new-low (DOA: 16th May 2023)

Quinn, James (2015) ‘Amazon’s Jeff Bezos: With Jeremy Clarkson, we’re entering a new age of golden television’, The Telegraph, Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/amazon/11800890/jeff-bezos-interview-amazon-prime-jeremy-clarkson.html (DOA: 16th May 2023)

Ravindran, Manori (2023) ‘Amazon Likely to Part Ways with Jeremy Clarkson After Final Commissioned Shows Go to Air; ‘Grand Tour’ Host Sent Email Apology to Harry & Meghan’, Variety, Available at: https://variety.com/2023/tv/global/jeremy-clarkson-amazon-grand-tour-canceled-1235490701/ (DOA: 20th May 2023)

Selby, Jenn (2015) ‘Jeremy Clarkson calls on trolls to leave producer Oisin Tymon alone: ‘None of this is his fault’, The Independent, Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/jeremy-clarkson-calls-on-trolls-to-leave-producer-oisin-tymon-alone-none-of-this-is-his-fault-10136894.html (DOA: 16th May 2023)

Sharp, Christopher (2023) ‘Meghan’s biographer claims ‘hate can do crazy things’ after Clarkson’s apology backfires’, Express, Available at: https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1722497/meghan-markle-omid-scobie-jeremy-clarkson (DOA: 16th May 2023)

Sherwin, Adam (2022) ‘Jeremy Clarkson Meghan Sun column embarrasses Rupert Murdoch and drags Rishi Sunak into row’, i, Available at: https://inews.co.uk/news/media/jeremy-clarkson-meghan-sun-column-embarrasses-rupert-murdoch-and-drags-rishi-sunak-into-row-2038150 (DOA: 16th May 2023)

Filmography

Brainiac: Science Abuse (Peter Eyre, 2003-2008)

Clarkson (Brian Klein, 1998-2000)

Clarkson’s Farm (Gavin Whitehead, 2021- )

Game of Thrones (David Benioff and D. B. Weiss, 2011-2019)

The Grand Tour (Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hammond, James May, and Andy Wilman, 2016- )

Have I Got News for You (Harry Thompson and Jimmy Mulville, 1990- )

James May’s Toy Stories (James May, 2009-2014)

QI (John Lloyd, 2003- )

Never Mind the Buzzcocks (Bill Matthews and Simon Bullivant, 1996- )

Top Gear (Derek Smith, 1977-2001)

Top Gear (Jeremy Clarkson and Andy Wilman, 2002- )

Total Wipeout (Matt Kunitz and Scott Karsen, 2009-2012, 2020)