Tuesday, 13 April 2010

A note on Ellie

Ah, bless her little stilettoed shoes, Ellie Gellard seems to be attracting a bit of negative attention following her little hype (wo)man piece for Gordon ‘Bam Bam’ Brown yesterday.

As far as I can see it, there are three main criticisms of her in the papers at the moment…

1. A couple of years ago she blogged that Gordon Brown should quit as leader of the Labour party. I think Guido was one of the first to point this out.

I have a few thoughts on this – the first is that Guido is using the level of spite he normally reserves for Cabinet ministers. Perhaps that’s because he feels threatened by the poor little sweetheart, and he doesn’t normally feel threatened by other bloggers.

Anyway, the girl’s 20, which means she was about 18 two years’ ago. People do change their views at lot as they get older, particularly in that 16-30 bracket. I should know - I’m 29 and ¾.

The other thing that few people are pointing out is that two years’ ago coincided with when Polly Toynbee was calling for GB’s head. And we all know that Ellie has a slightly embarrassing new-border-on-prefect-style crush on the Toynbee lady. Who now thinks Gordon is the future (fair for all).

2. She once said something about hoping Thatcher would fall down the stairs on a skateboard. This has particularly angered the Mail.

Fair enough. Whatever your opinion of Mrs T, she is an elderly lady and wishing harm on her is childish and a bit mean.

I think that this says something a bit more about the quality of online discourse than it does about Miss (Ms?) Gellard’s character. I can’t be arsed to look, but I’d be willing to bet that I can find all sorts of right wing blogs with comments that could be construed as threats to ZaNu Liebore politicians, particularly that smiley Tony bloke.

It turns out people are even more of an arsehole online. People do say the most ridiculous things. But yes, silly girl to wish bodily harm on an old lady. I don't think she really meant it.

3. She is young, shrill and privileged. I think she’s probably all of those things.

To start with the privileged bit, I don’t know much about her background, but I think it’s sort of Holland Park and that. Anyway, who gives a fuck? You can’t rubbish criticism of David Cameron’s privileged background and then use that same argument against one of your opponents.

The young and shrill bit – young, of course. She can’t help that, can she?

The shrill bit – almost all young people talking about politics come over as pompous twats. Think of the first time you saw William Hague – but he seems to have got over that little presentation issue, and is now considered one of the true Tory heavyweights.

Although I’d rather watch a young Ellie talk than a young Hague (and yes, I didn’t use ‘listen’ deliberately).

So there you go.


  1. The 'young' part is important because it means she has almost no experience upon which to base anything she's talking about. She hasn't a clue how almost all of the world, its systems and its inhabitants really work; no 20 year old has.

    Having a 20 year old do the introduction is like admitting they couldn't find anyone who knows what they're talking about who would stand up and praise Drongo.

    The 'priviledged' part is important because this is a person who stinks of hypocrisy. She's happy enough to take all the trappings and benefits of being well off, to live the life of Old Riley, while advocating a socialist life without any of those benefits for all the rest of us not so well off.

    She should try reading Animal Farm, now that she just might be old enough to understand it as a metaphor rather than a childrens' story about animals that's sad because the horse dies.

    She's a spoilt brat whose opinions are childishly unmatched either to reality or her own priviledged life.

    Apart from a far too big opinion of her own worth, the only thing she has of note is a modest amount of attractiveness - and that's why she was used. She was eye candy to take the lads' minds off the lies and nonsense the old fool after her was going to blather on about.

    And sure enough... is the news media discussing the pointless disingenous crud Brown coughed up? No, it's discussing the bimbo on before him.

  2. Didn't do it for you then?

    I disagree with you in that your comment implies that no 20 year old has a valid contribution to politics; they do.

    And I don't think she was there to distract the audience, more to show that Labour has the kids on its side.

    Anyway, you win a prize for being the first commenter on this blog. I'm not sure what it is yet. Possibly a signed picture of Ellie herself...

  3. "I disagree with you in that your comment implies that no 20 year old has a valid contribution to politics"

    Of course, they can - but they don't by default any more than anyone else does.

    The real question that I think the previous commenter was getting it is how much Ms Gellard really knows about politics.

    It's worth bearing in mind that Ms Gellard has had absolutely no personal experience of life under Lady Thatcher, in much the same way that the 24-year old who designed the Ashes to Ashes ad for Labour had no meaningful experience of the 80s. They are thus relying on immensely subjective second and third-hand experiences of those times to form an opinion, and I doubt they have been exposed to balanced opinions.

    I wonder whether Ms Gellard studied Nye Bevan at GCSE, for example. If so, did she study any conservatives? How much does she really know about Thatcher or Churchill, to take some very famous examples? How much does she know - as opposed to think/feel - about current politics?

    If she were shown to be genuinely knowledgeable about the subject, I would be rather impressed and would find her much more relevant. What I've seen of her so far suggests a passion for politics based in self-importance and fashion, so that she may as well be the object of Pulp's song Common People.

    A proper, no-kid-gloves political interview would easily discover this. Personally I think it was a very poor - and telling - choice by the Labour Party to use her as they did.

  4. I'm not sure you have to have lived through a period to have an opinion on it. But yes, the certainty of belief exhibited by poor Ellie has left her a bit open to criticism.

    Although that could be any young person I've ever spoken to (including myself). It's just they don't normally get that platform, so yes, blame Labour for that.

    Having paid only passing interest to her tweets previously, she always seemed up for the more rough and tumble side of politics. I hope this whole thing hasn't left her feeling more vulnerable. She is very young after all.

  5. To your first comment - indeed you don't, but it would be unusual for a 20-year old (or 18 for that matter) to have a balanced, well-informed opinion on a period she had not lived through. That's the obvious source of skepticism regarding Ms Gellard and the strength of her convictions.

    And on your final point - yes, I think this is exposing her to rather a worrying level of pressure and examination, and is a very good reason why Labour should have known better.

  6. "Two years' ago" what is this apostrophe for?! Using this once was an understandable mistake, a second time not so. Your work was compromised - I did not read on.

  7. Fair point. And a poor mistake. I will learn to read before posting.

    Interesting dilemma now - should one correct the mistake, or leave it up there for all to see? I’m leaning towards the latter.