When Ebenezer Scrooge was taken by the ghost of Christmas present to look through the window of the poor Cratchit family, the sight before his eyes made him wake up to the spirit of Christmas.
| Ebenezer realised the wrongs of his miserly existence, became a philanthropist, and everybody in Victorian England lived happily ever after - at least on Christmas day, when they all forgot about the woes of the world and had a shindig.
| But when the ghost of Christmas present returned some years later with the wise men of the New Labour elite, all they could see was a picture of social exclusion, antisocial behaviour, wanton indulgence, debt and all-round misery. They decided the rest of us should not only see it, but really feel it too.
| Take the speech made by chancellor of the exchequer Gordon Brown in November 2000, at the launch of a new fund to help children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Brown railed against the unfairness of advertising to the poorer sections of society: it's unfair, he thinks, that thousands of children get the presents they want from Santa, while other kids covet gifts they see advertised on TV, knowing that their parents will be unable to afford them. Unfair indeed - but hardly a shocking revelation. What does Brown have up his sleeve to resolve this unfairness - a new policy initiative to end all poverty in time for Christmas 2000? Not quite. But there's a move afoot to ban advertising aimed at children.
| Let's remember that when Ebenezer Scrooge saw poor mobility-challenged Tiny Tim Cratchit with hardly a brussel sprout to share with his brothers and sisters, his urge was to give, that they might all enjoy more the pleasure of receiving. How the ghosts of Christmas had duped this once-wise miser. Ebenezer Brown has come to a far more pragmatic conclusion: since we cannot solve the problems of social inequality, the least we can do is to make sure that poorer kids don't sit pining after the better things in life.
| Christmas is, some argue, a time for stress, strain and depression, when the traumas of last-minute shopping on Christmas Eve can reduce even the most rational grown-up to the mental capacities of an infant. Pretending we can cope in the face of such festive adversity is apparently only going to store up long-term psychological traumas for the rest of the year. Maybe we should give thanks, then, that there are wiser minds than ours to help us out.
| The UK Department of Trade and Industry's 'small print taskforce', announced by consumer affairs minister Dr Kim Howells, is to investigate the dangers of 'buy now - pay later' interest free deals on the high street. This initiative reminds us to keep caution away from all winter drafts, and not to overspend our budgets. For if there's one thing we should remember at Christmas time, it is the ever-present threat of debt and destitution forced upon us by the callous consumerists who run the high street.
| Newspaper columnist Tony Levene suggests that we should use Christmas to instil this important knowledge of the dangers of debt in our young. Rather than giving expensive toys that will be discarded by the end of Boxing Day, he says: 'Giving money can be more worthwhile, especially if linked to a long-term investment plan. And the younger the child is, the more valuable the end result.' (1) Wise words indeed: if there is one thing that always fills me with woe, it is the sight of young children opening their Christmas stockings with glowing eyes, as if their long-term financial situation was not even worth thinking about.
| Even here, though, we need to be careful. While encouraging our children to draw up investment plans for the future, we don't want to encourage them to become the kind of people who spend all day long talking to their accountant on a mobile phone. Some find it particularly worrying that mobile phones were one of the most popular presents in Christmas 2000, with over four million in Britain receiving them as gifts. In December, the children's store Toys 'R' Us is even selling mobiles aimed specifically at children, despite fears about health risks: which continue even though, after long and rigorous investigation, the Stewart inquiry into mobile phones found that 'there is no evidence that mobile-phone use damages health'. Will people never learn? Perhaps the compulsory warnings on mobile-phone packaging introduced in the run-up to Christmas will discourage in the future the thoughtless buying of these unnecessary items, which pose absolutely no risk to health.
| Surely, though, after all the stresses and strains in the run-up to Christmas, on the big day itself we should be allowed to sit back and relax after one-too-many advocate and lemonades while our majesty the Queen tells us what's planned for the year ahead. Or maybe not. The drinks-industry-funded 'sensible drinking campaigners', the Portman Group, is running a campaign under the catchy slogan 'If you do do drink, don't do drunk' (was the copywriting team back from a boozy Christmas lunch, perhaps?).
| Campaign posters, aimed at 18- to 24-year olds and to be placed in pubs and clubs around the country, warn us of the dangers of being 'trollied' into casualty, and invite us to choose between waking up the next morning with either a hangover or a girlfriend. Jean Coussins, director of the Portman Group, warns that drinking to get drunk not only poses long-term health risks, but also 'immediate personal risks' to 'dignity' (2). Indeed: there's nothing more nauseating than seeing people during the holiday period loaded up with alcohol, chanting 'Ding Dong Merrily' on high spirits, or flirting outrageously at parties. If the Portman Group's campaign isn't enough to keep us in check, the news that £100 penalties are to be introduced for 'disorderly behaviour', and that police will have new powers to shut down rowdy pubs, should make it clear to all that it's cheaper and safer all round to stay at home with a cup of cocoa.
| The UK Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) continues the dangers-of-alcohol theme, and adds a few more cautions of its own. 'Forget the saying "Safe as Houses"', cautions RoSPA's website, introducing its guide to Christmas home safety. 'Homes can be lethal, especially with the combination of alcohol, cooking, possible unfamiliar surroundings and new toys strewn round the house.' RoSPA warns of the Christmas dangers posed by everything from paperchains to fairylights, the 'connection between alcohol and fires', and hammers home the potential cooking-related injuries, from burns and scalds to slips and falls. Prevention of home accidents, concludes RoSPA, is 'much better than spending Boxing Day in a hospital's casualty department….Have a very merry Christmas!' (3)
| You might think that somebody has stolen all the Christmas spirit. But what is Christmas about anyway? Mary and Joseph, socially excluded and shunned in the 'walk-on-by' culture of Bethlehem folk, only to give birth in a shed to a child who would be tortured and crucified - so it must seem to primary school children, greedily awaiting their Easter eggs a mere four months later. Maybe Ebenezer had the right idea before some irresponsible ghost put odd ideas into his head; maybe the ne'r-do-well government initiatives around Christmas 2000 are a thankful reminder, to those who thought Christmas was about fun and cheer, that the world we live in is a gruesome and horrible place.
| May the Yuletide log roll from your fire and cleanse your house of consumerist sin. Bah humbug.
|
(1) 'When cash gifts can outlast a PlayStation', Guardian, 18 November 2000
| (2) Cited in 'Drinkers told not to "get wrecked"', Guardian, 20 November 2000
| (3) See the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents website
|
|  |
|
