Talk:Cliff Richard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
(If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Where mother born?

Hi

Please could you tell me where Sir Cliff's mother was born. My father in law insists that the lady was an Indian lady. I have seen a photo of his mother and I think that she was probably British. Please can you tell me the answer?

My e-mail is

Ba2836913@aol.com 22:25, 15 March 2004 195.93.32.10

Reply: Only Sir Cliff knows where, exactly, his mother was born but from my knowledge of the anglo-indian community, I guess that she was born in India. No, she was NOT an "Indian" lady. She was, quite clearly, an anglo-indian lady. There is a difference. The anglo-indians came about as a result of the British occupation in India. To start with, the British tea planters (merchants) from the East India Company were encouraged to marry Indian women. These marriages produced the anglo-indian children who would, later, form the anglo-indian community. A community which spread far and wide after the Independence of India in 1947. There are, currently, large anglo-indian communities in Australia, Canada and the UK.

Just to add to this, as far as I know being Indian and being Anglo-Indian are not exclusive. If Sir Cliff's mother was born in India, then she was Indian, regardless of her ancestry. Also, there is a reference to the British 'occupation' in India, but it was a colonisation rather than an occupation. DavidFarmbrough 07:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Being Anglo-Indian is very different to being Indian. After 1947 the Anglo-Indians were not welcome in India (they could not get jobs). Furthermore, Cliff Richard, himself, was born in Lucknow, India, in 1940. Do you think that he refers to himself as Indian? Just a thought.

I would like to add that most of the Anglo-Indians, living in India in the 1940s had British passports. They were, therefore, British. I think this is what Cliff Richard considers himself to be, despite the fact that he was born in India.

[edit] Copyright Violation?

This article reads like the liner notes from a boxed set retrospective, or something similar. Can the author please verify his work as authentic and original to Wikipedia? Jumbo 11:56, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I agree. I was drawn here by a link and discovered a mess. I attempted to introduce sub-heads and clean it up but there is virtually nothing about him as an individual human being. It requires the attention of someone who is both a fan and a writer to create a decent biography. (I am not that big of a fan.) MPLX/MH 23:24, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] None Pont of View

This article is vary none point of view and I think should be rewritten. 15:54, 6 February 2005 217.42.243.109

[edit] Britons surprised?

"Britons are always surprised that he is a virtual unknown in America, because during the height of his poularity there he had enjoyed Elvis like fame."

I've removed this because no where not surprised that he isn't famous in America, more often where glad. And leaving point of view aside this isn't very encyclopedic and is utterly frivolous. 17:54, 29 April 2005 217.42.25.38

The above comment is ignorance and shows a mere POV of a cliff hater, not someone who is interested in making an article better. 64.12.116.7 15:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Loved in Barbados too

It should also be noted that he spends most of his time in the tiny Caribbean luxury island of Barbados and is quite loved and appreciated there too. 21:57, 25 July 2005 216.110.107.3

I've added that he spends time there; need a reference for the 'being loved' part. Wasted Time R 00:53, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Portrayal of UK fame misleading

I don't why he is gay understand how he is supposed to be one of the UK's most popular artists. I think this is misleading. He certainly isn't. People often wonder who buys his records when he manages to get another number 1. I gather it is a generation of older people or fans of Christian music that he is popular with. His career has been very long which explains how he may seem to have achieved a lot more but he's not been popular consistantly throughout. I have no problem with the guy but this piece needs to be tweaked ever so slightly. He is not "enormously famous" in the UK, if he is recognised it is no great thing, it's for being a has-been who pops up every now and then. 12:18, 3 October 2005 82.41.85.24

I do not agree in any way with this assertion. Cliff Richard has been a famous start in the UK since the laste 1950s. However, with the changing nature of so called 'stardom', his along with many others has changed. Cliff is most likely viewed as a high profile 'celebrity' now as opposed to a 'pop star' I am sure that he is comfortable with that. For God's sake the guy is in his 60s. He had been famous since 1958. I am not a particular fan of Cliff's but would argue that he is most definetly famous!

That is only your own point of view. Here we go by facts. The fact he has had a long time in the charts actually show he is popular. Who wonders who buys his records? Certinaly not the millions who do. His tours across the UK still sell-out. When he brings out records they still make the charts and most do very well. The introduction has proof he has had OVER 150 records chart since the mid-1950s to the present day. Very few singers in the UK have the level of fame and success Cliff Richard has, this is proven by facts, not my obersvations, not vague estimations, but solid facts from the music industry. You might be misguided and think he isn't but the facts are 100% there to show he is. Please look at all the facts first. To then say he isn't "enormously famous" after doing so would just be ignorace. 66.66.161.1 18:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Could people please stop adding the words "aged 30 and up", after "one of the UK's most popular singers", even if this were true, it makes no diffrence. To be a popular singer it is based on the whole population and there is no need for that line to be added. When a song is a hit and sells the most, no one mentioned ages groups, i.e no other article would say "it was the biggest record of 2006, amoung those aged between 10 and 25, it wasn't bought by many people in other age groups". Cliff is one of the UK's most popular singers, based on chart facts, record sales and concert tickets and that's that. 66.66.161.1 18:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trying to add balance → copyright violation?

As a long time observer of Cliff's career I have tried to make the profile more balanced. However I feel the negative spin to these comments in this discussion box show an emnity towards him that is not really justified. 22:14, 17 October 2005 86.130.211.157 a/k/a Marvin Khan 23:08, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately your contribution looked very much like it was copied from another source, which isn't allowed in Wikipedia, and thus it has been removed twice. Even if it wasn't copied, it still was not satisfactory, as it was not integrated into the rest of the article, but instead stood as a parallel alternative to much of the article. Furthermore it lacked "wikification", meaning links to other articles and adherence to Wikipedia style conventions. Wasted Time R 23:54, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
However, I have now incorporated many of the points this text made, with rephrased wording, into the flow of the article. Wasted Time R 02:33, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cliff & The Beatles

I do not think it likely that Cliff advised the Beatles at the start of their recording career - their approaches to music were too opposed. MK. 22:14, 17 October 2005 86.130.211.157

You are right on this. The Hunter Davies Beatles biography states that the Beatles generally disliked Cliff Richard's music and tried to everything different from him, in terms of looks, music, and roles (no one lead singer, for example). I've removed the assertions. Wasted Time R 01:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
That's funny, as The Beatles have nothing but praise for Cliff in The Beatles anthology interviews!
The Beatles' Cry For A Shadow was a Shadows-inspired instrumental and Paul McCartney wrote Here, There, And Everywhere for The Shadows originally. They have said they disliked Norrie Paramor's strings and asked George Martin not to use this approach to his orchestrations, so it could be that they liked early period (Rock 'N'Roll) Cliff & The Shadows but the not mid-period pop. DavidFarmbrough 07:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sectioning

The existing sections broke his career out by recording, film/tv, personal life, etc., except that the text was really more chronological with the different career aspects all mixed together. Thus, I've changed the section names to be on a more chronological basis. Wasted Time R 00:12, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] nickname

Should we mention that he often used to be referred to as "the peter pan of pop" ?

-- Beardo 06:25, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Only if you state that the current one is Michael Jackson. CO.

[edit] Sexuality


Hayday 15:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the problem here is that you refer to a 'well-known fact' but don't give any source for this. This is what is known as a 'rumour'. DavidFarmbrough 07:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Please can someone prove that Sir Cliff "isn't" a homosexual? (perhaps his long-term partner and boyfriend could add some words in his defence?) Hayday 21:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

What does it matter how Sir Cliff gets through the night? 1) It's 2006, 2) We are all grown-ups (including his partner(s) (if any) which is more than we can say about some 'celebrities'), 3) He has never put his head above the parapet to condemn anybody else's sexuality, and so can therefore never be accused of being a hypocrite. Therefore if he wants to keep his cards close to his chest, that's fine. MaxieT 10:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Best-known singer?

The first sentence in this article makes the rather bold, unreferenced statement that Cliff is the UK's best-known singer. There needs to be a reference for such a grand statement... otherwise it should be replaced with something less absolute (for example, "among the UK's best-known singers"). EuroSong talk 22:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah okay, it's already been reverted :P EuroSong talk 22:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categories

The categorisation of him being English (actor, singer, etc) is incorrect. The correct categorisation is British. He was not born in either England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. He was actually born in India. Culturally he can be described as a British entertainer and British actor given that he appeal was through all the United Kingdom, and cannot claim a regional identification with one of the UK nations by birth, so he can no more be called English than Scottish. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 22:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I have to disagree somewhat. Why can't he both English and British? If he has English (Anglo-Saxon) parents, then that makes him English. I say somewhat because certainly the word English is often misapplied to people whose ethnicity is definitely not English. In that case, the term British applies.

[edit] References

I've added the unreferenced tag as this article has a lot of statements with no references or links to back them up - in fact, there's no proper references listed anywhere, just some external links for some of the claims. Wibbble 22:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Young Ones

No mention of his charity recording of "Living Doll" with The_Young_Ones_(TV_series)? It was for comic relief in the eighties, but I don't know enough to add to the page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.56.55.105 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Cliff and the f-word

I removed the paragraph mentioning Cliff's image after the use of the f-word. As is apparent from TV-footage on Youtube, Cliff Richard was prompted several times by Gordon Ramsay to say "fuck" and was reluctant to say it but eventually gave in. Linguini 00:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's relevant: he did still say it, as you've just confirmed. I'm also not sure that your depiction of it actually matches what can be seen, for example here: [1] I'm going to revert the removal since I don't think this is sufficient reason to remove this part of the article. Wibbble 00:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
The paragraph doubts Cliff Richard's "entirely clean cut" image because of him saying "fuck off". This is a misinterpretation of the actual situation in which Ramsay prompted Richard to say "fuck off" to him and Richard, jokingly, gave in. In this context, however, the utterance loses its relevance for Cliff Richard's image. What he shows here is perhaps the willingness to go along with a type of humour that he wouldn't normally use. Linguini 00:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
What he shows here is perhaps the willingness to go along with a type of humour that he wouldn't normally use. which is exactly the point, I think, since that is what goes against his 'clean-cut image'. Now, it might be better placed in the 'trivia' section (along with a mention of his vineyard), but I do think that it merits inclusion. A Google search shows that this was widely reported in the media at the time. Wibbble 01:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
It's interesting what the media made of this episode. The Independent writes, Cliff Richard had been "shouting the phrase 'fuck off!'" The video shows that he's not shouting at all. The Independent reports that Ramsay had said 'Cliff, it's your fucking wine'." Again wrong, the line doesn't even occur in the dialogue. The Independent apparently quotes Gordon Ramsay: "He obviously didn't like to hear that, so he turned around and told me, to my face, that I could 'fuck off'." A completely wrong impression is created.
What we can see in the video is Cliff Richard being tricked into slagging his own wine off ('it tastes harsh'). As it is revealed to him he's guffawing and laughing off the embarrassment. A few more laughing and joking remarks between the two men. Then Gordon Ramsay leans over to him and says into his ear: "You can tell me to fuck off now", after which Cliff Richard says jokingly "Young man you can fuck off now". Again guffaws and laughter from both men.
In terms of the interaction between them, "You can tell me to fuck off now " is Gordon Ramsay apparently offering solidarity to Cliff Richard, who's just been made to look a bit foolish. Cliff Richard accepts the offer and says exactly what he's told to say, this way creating solidarity with his host and allowing them both to laugh it off and to resolve the tension. As often is the case in everyday interaction, humour is used to resolve a tense and embarrassing situation. In this case you get the impression that it's not exactly Cliff Richard's kind of humour and that he's not entirely comfortable with it, but he plays along with it.
Against his squeaky-clean image? Now way. I would have found it much more amusing if he had really sworn at Gordon Ramsay, leaving him baffled and speechless. Linguini 09:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I think, once again, you've just made my point for me. The fact that the event was mis-reported doesn't change the fact that it was reported, and is therefor both notable and verified. I'm going to add this back into the article as a simple revert, and I'll move it to the 'trivia' section later on. You might not like how it has been presented, but wikipedia isn't a place for your personal POV. Wibbble 12:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
You've removed exactly the nonsense which bugged me the first time I read it. It's fine now, absolutely no problem. Linguini 02:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Editing the article rather than removing content which does not agree with your POV might have been preferable, then. Wibbble 12:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
It's not "POV" when the article contains rumours from the tabloids which are clearly misreported - is it? Perhaps we should be a bit more careful what we accept as useful information to begin with. Linguini 16:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
The original phrasing was talking about his reputation and public image, which is pretty much defined by newspaper reporting accurate or not. Wibbble 17:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Sure. The newspapers never get tired with spreading gossip and shaping public images. Even more reason to be careful about the nature of a report before inserting its content into a Wikipedia article. Watching the original episode again, I noticed that Cliff Richard never used the word "undrinkable" for what was seemingly revealed as his own wine. Also, I think, the jovial character of the episode should be mentioned. Linguini 20:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I just copied the text from the original without double-checking it, thanks for the correction. However, I'm removing 'jokingly', since it doesn't represent a neutral point of view or an encyclopaedic tone. The article's bad enough - just stating the facts should be sufficient, and allow the reader to come to their own conclusions. Wibbble 21:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I clearly prefer when readers can come to their own conclusions. No problem if they could watch the episode for themselves. Here, they get the impression that "fuck off" was the immediate response to the revealing of the wine. In reality it was the response to Gordon Ramsay saying "you can tell me to fuck off now". How can a wrong impression be avoided without blowing up the passage with more detail? Linguini 21:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Er.. I think by remvoing 'jokingly' you have not removed a POV you have removed the context and utterly changed the meaning of the words. Jooler 21:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I would agree. Linguini 21:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
My goal is to make it as neutral as possible and avoid any more problems with the tone of the article, which is already pretty poor. Wibbble 22:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I see your point but I also have an interest in the readers getting a realistic impression of what happened. I'll rephrase it. Linguini 23:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/l/i/Talk%7ECliff_Richard_a903.html"