Gee, Emma Peel seemed more talented than a mere amateur... And was she in this just for the fun of it, with no salary?
Whatever one-word description should they've used instead which sounds less condescending yet suitably pretentious?
I vote for "attachée."
It sounds appropriately nebulous and sophisticated and can mean whatever you want it to.
--
Amateur refers to the fact that she was not a professional. Unlike Steed, she never went through actual government training as an agent nor did she have formal qualifications in this field. Breaking it down the two terms are still used today. She did however have natural talent.
Despite sounding pretentious (as well as condescending) amateur is what the producers went with when describing her status when it came to her involvement in investigating crimes.
Plus she was a wealthy woman already as her father own companies and she inherited all of that upon his death (check out the episode "The House That Jack Built" which gives her character's back history).
Yes, but it's always felt so '60s chauvinisticky.
--
Non-sequiturs are delicious.
You're right about that. It's sometimes awkward to watch an old series and see some of the blatant and even subtle forms of chauvinism that permeated through television in that era
shareI don't think it was meant in a chauvinistic way at all. The word "amateur" is used simply to emphasize that she's an adventuress who joins Steed on his assignments for the sheer excitement and thrill of danger. Mrs. Peel is one of the most progressive female characters on television, in any era.
hkfilmnews.blogspot.com
porfle.blogspot.com
I agree with porfle. He was the trained professional, she was a talented amateur but they were both amazing people. By definition, an amateur is a person who engages in a pursuit, esp. a sport, on an unpaid basis. Emma wasn't paid. Therefore an amateur.
In the kingdom of the blind, you're the village idiot.
Thanks, zaphod08! Also, detective fiction is filled with brilliant characters who are described as "amateur sleuths." Usually, they prove themselves better than the professional police detectives.
hkfilmnews.blogspot.com
porfle.blogspot.com
Yes, yes, yes, but "amateur" still sounds so unnecessarily patronizing.
--
The most profound of sin is tragedy unremembered.
There was no reason to use a different term in 1960s Britain. All of those connotations of "mere" and "condescending" and "patronizing" are more modern / American bits of baggage attached to the word "amateur". In some ways "talented amateur" would have been considered preferable to "professional" in that time & place.
A half century ago Britain was more class conscious. Nobility was better, and was still in the latter stages of tending to prefer not being "professional" at anything ...... at least in part because it implied needing to work for a living. Remember, professionals weren't allowed to enter major tournaments (such as Wimbledon) until 1968. Champions were still expected to be "above" the crassness of such things as professionalism.
"American bits of baggage." Jeeezus.
--
The most profound of sin is tragedy unremembered.
I disagree with the "American bits of baggage" thing myself. However, the use of the word "amateur" has already been thoroughly and sufficiently explained in this thread, so the dogged insistence that there's something condescending or patronizing about it seems willfully obtuse.
"Willfully obtuse". Double Jeeezus~~!
--
The chessboard sequence was added on for American broadcast to explain who and what The Avengers were since the new American audience would be unfamiliar with the premise. The American broadcasts began with the Diana Rigg monochrome episodes because they were filmed, not videotaped in the PAL format which was incompatible with American broadcast format.
I always assumed that the pronunciations of the words "amateur" and "extra-ordinary" were deliberately chosen for their distinctively British pronunciations.
Looking through Dave Rogers' book "The Complete Avengers" again, I found this portion of an early production directive concerning the characters of Steed and his then-partner Dr. Keel (Ian Hendry) which should lay the matter of intent regarding the word "amateur" to rest. About the male character of Keel, the directive states:
"KEEL, being a doctor, is the 'amateur.' This does not mean that he is less good at the 'job' but simply that his motives for concerning himself with a mission are quite different from Steed's. Without being at all 'goody-goody' he will, usually, be fired by a sense of public service, kindled by his humanitarian instincts."
hkfilmnews.blogspot.com
porfle.blogspot.com
I don't understand a lot of British phraseology.
Wasn't Sherlock Holmes considered an "amateur detective"?
No, because he usually got PAID for it.
shareWhich is why I'm confused.
When do people in England stop being amateurs and start being considered professionals?
I can see why it can be confusing as the term 'amateur' has different meanings.
Strictly speaking an amateur is someone who engages in some activity (i.e. sport, acting etc) generally for pleasure and not for payment as opposed to a professional who does it for a living. That does not mean that someone who is a professional but does their profession for free on occasions would be classed as an amateur.
However 'amateur' is now often used as a derogatory term to describe someone who is inept at something and I think this is why the term 'amateur' (even if
talented) would seem inappropriate in the UK. For example if I described an actor in play 'amateurish' then he or she would not be very good whether it was an amateur production or not.
I don't ever recall the term 'talented amateur' ever being used in the UK to describe Mrs Peel, perhaps it was only used in the USA where it may have been used in it's strictest sense.
A more accurate term to describe Mrs Peel would be an 'unpaid freelance associate' but this is rather long winded.
Thank you for clearing that up. (I hope)
I totally understand that there is a difference between American and British phraseology. And I understand that a person can be very, very good at what they do and not get paid for it.
However 'amateur' is now often used as a derogatory term to describe someone who is inept at something and I think this is why the term 'amateur' (even if
talented) would seem inappropriate in the UK. For example if I described an actor in play 'amateurish' then he or she would not be very good whether it was an amateur production or not.
Just to clarify (or confuse) things further, there are many amateur dramatic societies in the UK and although the actors may get paid a nominal amount from a share of the takings they don't do it as a full time job, it's not their main source of income and they are usually just doing it for a hobby. If they are really good at acting then they may get the chance to give up their day job and become a full time professional actor.
share