Posh person in Poundland vol 2,307
Yay! It's the "Posh person in Poundland" story! Ho ho! Go, on, start laughing, cos it's going to be a right old belter, this one! A posh person - in Poundland! Innit? Hahaha! Yes, wipe away those tears of delight and prepare for a hilarity rollercoaster ride! Tee hee!
Look, I'm not going to poke fun at Charlotte Metcalf for not being financially well off. That would be snide and pathetic. I'm not going to poke fun at her because of these few sentences
because why shouldn't people shop at Harrods and buy nice things? That's perfectly okay with me. And of course, it must seem a lifetime away if things have gone wrong and you're feeling the pinch at Christmas time. That's all fine and there's nothing wrong with any of that, at all.
No, I'm going to poke fun at Charlotte Metcalf because of this:
There's nothing wrong with doing the whole "Even people who are a bit posh have had to cut back" or "this recession is affecting lots of us, not only the bad people in the North who smoke and smell" - those are perfectly legitimate things. But the whole "I went to Poundland, yikes!" load of old cobblers is pretty tired now, especially in the Mail. Long-memoried regular readers of this blog of joy (and I love both of you) will recall it already having been done by Jan Moir and Petronella Wyatt.
Aside from that paragraph, I actually don't think it's as stinky an article as it could be. I feel quite sympathetic towards the author - perhaps it's that picture of her with her daughter that stops me getting so grumpy as I might otherwise do it; it's like when Jehovah's Witnesses come knocking on your door with their kids in tow so you can't swear at them. I know, I know; there's probably an element of flamebaitery about the whole thing, and yes, there's the whole Liz Jones-style not being able to put things into tremendously good perspective in terms of what constitutes poverty. Sure. But it's Christmas, people! I'm not going to be the one slagging people off for saying they're not too well off. Just leave out the Poundland rubbish next time...
Related posts:





December 5th, 2010 - 21:16
The article serves two purposes. The first is as flamebait, as which it is very successful.
The second is for Ms Metcalf to serve as an Aunt Sally, a punchbag, a diversion. She makes a good “rich whinger” target for Mail readers’ outrage, thus allowing them to position themselves as the true “squeezed middle class”, hard done by in comparison with her. They need not consider the daily lives of, or pressures faced by, those much poorer than themselves; and can indeed carry on looking down on and resenting the poor.
And all this without ever questioning the system.
December 6th, 2010 - 09:29
+1.
December 6th, 2010 - 08:29
Eh. For the last 3 years now, my brothers and I have only got presents from Poundland from our parents. And only a few at that. But hell, we appreciated it. GOD FORBID ANYONE SHOULD SHOP THERE.
December 6th, 2010 - 08:43
Deborah Colcutt in the Evening Standard pulled out one of these last week. it was without the most patronising pieve of ‘journalism’ I’ve ever read.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-23902777-a-weekend-eating-poundland-food.do
Choice quote “If (my daighter) saw the pink label Heinz Barbie pasta in tomato sauce she would never eat broccoli or quinoa again”
December 6th, 2010 - 09:44
wtf is wrong with Poundland style shops anyway? You can get your branded cleaning products cheaper than your usual supermarket. Same stuff, better prive. What’s not to like?
December 6th, 2010 - 09:45
that was meant to be *price* obviously
December 6th, 2010 - 09:58
@badhedgehog makes a very sharp observation. Perhaps we ought to feel sorry for Ms Metcalf for being taken advantage of by The Mail. Perhaps, but anyone who writes for the Mail has it coming.
December 6th, 2010 - 10:47
Eh. £500 a week is very well off to most people, which I think was the source of most of the ire…”not too well off” seems to have a different definition in Mailland.
Until I was 13 I used to get a satsuma and some chocolate coins for Christmas. Never did me any harm *eyetwitch*
December 6th, 2010 - 12:26
This article just made me sad really, Metcalf is either winding people up [see previous articles of hers], or is utterly misguided when it comes to providing for her daughter. Either way, i felt more pity than sympathy really, and not for the reasons she appeared to be looking for anyway.
i like badhedgehogs interpretation though. But what struck me was that many of those commenting underneath were not describing financial situations i’d associate with Mail readers. it turned into a competition to see who was the most squeezed. basically, it was depressing from every perspective
December 6th, 2010 - 13:02
Meanwhile, here’s the Telegraph’s idea of a “typical” family: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/8179533/Play-happy-families-to-make-a-million.html
December 6th, 2010 - 13:03
When she’s asking for sympathy after saying she earns £500 a week, which is a damn fair wage – around the average in fact – she deserves mockery. I do think that the Mail likes wheeling these people out (and they’re always women, why is that?) so their readers can punch a poor posho, but really. How hard is it to tell your kids that an iPad is too expensive? Jesus, most parents buy Wiis for both/all children because of the price and this tyke wants an iPad to herself? She gets a day working in a homeless shelter and maybe something from HMV. /rant
December 6th, 2010 - 13:33
I’m sorry, but it wasn’t the Poundland references which annoyed me. It wasn’t that she used to shop at Harrods, but can no longer afford to do so.
It was more the fact that she appears to complain that she only earns £500 a week. And, nowhere in the piece does she admit what her partner earns which, ultimately, could take the household well above what most people would consider poverty, nouveau or otherwise.
I volunteer at a primary school, in a pretty rough area, and was speaking with one of the teachers the other week who, after nearly 15 years of educating youngsters, is earning around the same money as the Daily Mail contributor feels is borderline penury.
Said teacher has never been able to afford to buy a house, never mind several of them, like our poor writer, because a combination of comparatively low salary, student debt and spiralling house prices over that period conspired to make it practically impossible for her, like many public sector workers, to get on the housing ladder as a single person.
No-one asked Ms Metcalf and her partner to mortgage (and presumably remortgage) themselves to the hilt, just before the housing bubble burst.
This might makes me something of the seasonal Grinch, but I can’t muster much in the way of sympathy for Ms Metcalf. I’d prefer to reserve it for those who, despite serving the public in education and health, will never get a sniff at the kind of lifestyle she once had and, indeed, lost through nothing more than hyper-consumerism.
To complain of her woes looks like a poke in the eye for those who really are suffering, as well as those for whom £500 a week is considered appropriate recompense for far more demanding, and necessary, work.