WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.220 Welcome to the Deep Dive, the place where we 00:00:02.220 --> 00:00:04.559 take stacks of sources and give you the distilled 00:00:04.559 --> 00:00:07.679 genius inside. Today, we are deep diving into 00:00:07.679 --> 00:00:10.800 the extensive, fascinating and frequently frustrated 00:00:10.800 --> 00:00:13.500 career of a man who has become, well, arguably 00:00:13.500 --> 00:00:15.839 the defining intellectual voice of modern British 00:00:15.839 --> 00:00:18.879 comedy, the brilliant comedian, actor and writer 00:00:18.879 --> 00:00:23.809 David Mitchell. It really is a career of. Fascinating 00:00:23.809 --> 00:00:26.129 duality, isn't it? Mitchell has somehow managed 00:00:26.129 --> 00:00:29.269 to maintain this career -defining creative partnership, 00:00:29.390 --> 00:00:32.450 the one that gave us one of the UK's most critically 00:00:32.450 --> 00:00:35.710 revered but initially quite niche sitcoms, Beep 00:00:35.710 --> 00:00:38.009 Show. Absolutely essential viewing. While also 00:00:38.009 --> 00:00:40.689 conquering the vast mainstream, he became the 00:00:40.689 --> 00:00:42.729 undisputed ubiquitous master of the panel game. 00:00:42.929 --> 00:00:44.750 Yeah, you can't turn on Dave without seeing him 00:00:44.750 --> 00:00:47.229 usually. Exactly. So our mission today is to 00:00:47.229 --> 00:00:49.679 synthesize that journey for you. How did this 00:00:49.679 --> 00:00:52.259 sharp -witted analyst move from, you know, early 00:00:52.259 --> 00:00:55.619 Footlights failures to becoming what the Independent 00:00:55.619 --> 00:00:57.740 quite rightly called the Prince Regent of TV 00:00:57.740 --> 00:00:59.810 comedy? It's a great title for him. And when 00:00:59.810 --> 00:01:01.350 we talk about Mitchell, we're not just discussing 00:01:01.350 --> 00:01:03.189 a performer, are we? We're discussing a whole 00:01:03.189 --> 00:01:06.409 brand of humor. It's built on anxiety, systems, 00:01:06.810 --> 00:01:10.370 rigorous logic. And the two roles that really 00:01:10.370 --> 00:01:12.989 define him are, of course, first, the eternally 00:01:12.989 --> 00:01:15.709 stressed, systems -obsessed, internal monologue 00:01:15.709 --> 00:01:18.489 champion Mark Corrigan. That's in the seminal 00:01:18.489 --> 00:01:21.290 Channel 4 sitcom Peep Show. Ah, Mark Corrigan. 00:01:21.430 --> 00:01:23.650 And that show, I mean, it ran for nine series, 00:01:23.790 --> 00:01:26.549 nine. That's a powerhouse of consistency holding 00:01:26.549 --> 00:01:28.629 the record as Channel 4's longest running sitcom 00:01:28.629 --> 00:01:31.109 ever. Incredible. And the second role, the one 00:01:31.109 --> 00:01:33.450 that probably cemented his wider public persona, 00:01:33.590 --> 00:01:37.590 is the prepared, slightly curmudgeonly intellectual 00:01:37.590 --> 00:01:40.989 who just excels in that unscripted arena. Right. 00:01:41.049 --> 00:01:43.409 The panel shows. We see this perfectly in his 00:01:43.409 --> 00:01:45.329 role as a team captain on What I Lie to You. 00:01:45.670 --> 00:01:48.310 That role lets him distill his wit into these. 00:01:48.599 --> 00:01:51.760 passionate, well -reasoned, and often hilarious 00:01:51.760 --> 00:01:54.780 defenses of, well, sometimes quote, trivial positions. 00:01:55.140 --> 00:01:57.700 Yeah, the Lance are legendary. They are. And 00:01:57.700 --> 00:01:59.620 it's made him an indispensable fixture on UK 00:01:59.620 --> 00:02:02.829 television. So we've got a huge volume of source 00:02:02.829 --> 00:02:05.650 material to work with today. It spans his comedy 00:02:05.650 --> 00:02:07.829 writing, his historical nonfiction, which is 00:02:07.829 --> 00:02:10.550 fascinating, his journalism, his diverse acting 00:02:10.550 --> 00:02:12.810 career. That's a lot to cover. It really is. 00:02:12.849 --> 00:02:15.129 It's a comprehensive look at how one man managed 00:02:15.129 --> 00:02:17.729 to become the ultimate go -to funny man of the 00:02:17.729 --> 00:02:20.389 moment, as The Guardian nicely put it. So let's 00:02:20.389 --> 00:02:22.250 unpack this journey, starting right at the beginning. 00:02:22.349 --> 00:02:25.569 Let's look at how the early intellectual landscape 00:02:25.569 --> 00:02:30.550 of his life really shaped his humor. and the 00:02:30.550 --> 00:02:33.289 birth of a partnership. Okay. So, David James 00:02:33.289 --> 00:02:35.810 Stuart Mitchell, born in Salisbury, Wiltshire, 00:02:35.849 --> 00:02:39.030 back in 1974. And his early background, I think, 00:02:39.050 --> 00:02:41.030 holds a crucial key to understanding that analytical 00:02:41.030 --> 00:02:43.229 nature he has, even though its roots are surprisingly, 00:02:43.409 --> 00:02:47.340 well, flexible. His parents, Catherine Gray and 00:02:47.340 --> 00:02:49.960 Ian Douglas Mitchell, were originally hotel managers. 00:02:50.219 --> 00:02:52.340 Hotel managers. That's almost too perfect, isn't 00:02:52.340 --> 00:02:54.439 it? Hospitality management, it's a field defined 00:02:54.439 --> 00:02:57.620 by rigorous systems, customer service. It seems 00:02:57.620 --> 00:02:59.819 like the ideal foundation for the man who'd play 00:02:59.819 --> 00:03:02.919 Mark Corrigan. It really does. And that analytical 00:03:02.919 --> 00:03:06.379 bent, it only deepened. When David was just two, 00:03:06.599 --> 00:03:09.659 his parents made this massive career pivot. They 00:03:09.659 --> 00:03:12.000 went from hands -on hotel management to becoming 00:03:12.000 --> 00:03:14.979 lecturers in hotel management. Ah, so academia. 00:03:15.340 --> 00:03:17.740 Exactly. And this change was reportedly driven 00:03:17.740 --> 00:03:19.979 by wanting a better work -life balance, you know, 00:03:20.000 --> 00:03:22.120 more time with David and his younger brother 00:03:22.120 --> 00:03:25.439 Daniel. So this stability, this academic environment, 00:03:25.680 --> 00:03:28.180 it certainly seems to have encouraged his initial 00:03:28.180 --> 00:03:30.969 intellectual ambitions. What's also quite revealing 00:03:30.969 --> 00:03:33.110 about his identity is his deliberate choice, 00:03:33.289 --> 00:03:35.569 which he often discusses, to identify as British 00:03:35.569 --> 00:03:37.949 rather than specifically English. Yeah, and that's 00:03:37.949 --> 00:03:40.310 rooted in his ancestry. His mother is Welsh, 00:03:40.449 --> 00:03:42.650 from Swansea originally, and his father's family 00:03:42.650 --> 00:03:44.710 has deep roots in Scotland. Right. This whole 00:03:44.710 --> 00:03:46.909 background was actually explored in depth on 00:03:46.909 --> 00:03:49.050 that show, Who Do You Think You Are?, back in 00:03:49.050 --> 00:03:51.680 2009. He discovered a direct connection to two 00:03:51.680 --> 00:03:55.099 pretty significant Gaelic scholars, John Forbes 00:03:55.099 --> 00:03:58.280 and Alexander Robert Forbes. Wow, really? Yeah. 00:03:58.400 --> 00:04:04.000 So this mix, Welsh, Scottish, English, it strongly 00:04:04.000 --> 00:04:06.300 reinforces that overarching British identity. 00:04:06.560 --> 00:04:08.759 It's something he's publicly stated he feels 00:04:08.759 --> 00:04:11.580 intensely connected to, especially when he talks 00:04:11.580 --> 00:04:13.400 about political matters concerning the Union. 00:04:13.740 --> 00:04:16.079 OK, so that's the background. His education then 00:04:16.079 --> 00:04:18.879 followed a very traditional independent route, 00:04:18.980 --> 00:04:21.980 prestigious private schools, new college school, 00:04:22.199 --> 00:04:26.240 then Abingdon School. And early on, he apparently 00:04:26.240 --> 00:04:29.339 harbored these serious and maybe somewhat conflicting 00:04:29.339 --> 00:04:32.399 career ambitions. Yeah. He admitted later that 00:04:32.399 --> 00:04:35.350 his childhood dreams were kind of split. He genuinely 00:04:35.350 --> 00:04:38.189 wanted to be a comedian or an actor, but recognizing 00:04:38.189 --> 00:04:41.189 how unstable that path might seem, he initially 00:04:41.189 --> 00:04:43.550 told people he wanted to be a barrister. A barrister. 00:04:43.750 --> 00:04:46.170 Or maybe even prime minister, which speaks volumes 00:04:46.170 --> 00:04:48.410 about his early love of argument, structure, 00:04:48.529 --> 00:04:51.350 power. Definitely. He sort of held back his real 00:04:51.350 --> 00:04:53.470 comedy aspirations until he got to university, 00:04:53.709 --> 00:04:55.750 you know, the comparative anonymity there, where 00:04:55.750 --> 00:04:58.310 he felt safer pursuing them openly. Right. And 00:04:58.310 --> 00:05:00.110 here's what I think is the absolute hinge moment, 00:05:00.209 --> 00:05:02.009 the psychological development thing that informs 00:05:02.009 --> 00:05:05.149 his entire comedic output. He had apparently 00:05:05.149 --> 00:05:07.110 been used to being, you know, top of the class 00:05:07.110 --> 00:05:09.970 through primary and prep school. But when he 00:05:09.970 --> 00:05:12.490 got to Abingdon, he had this moment of, well, 00:05:12.569 --> 00:05:16.350 brutal intellectual clarity. Exactly that. He 00:05:16.350 --> 00:05:19.350 realized, looking at his peers at Abingdon, that 00:05:19.350 --> 00:05:22.649 there were many people demonstrably more intelligent 00:05:22.649 --> 00:05:25.629 than him. Yeah, he saw he couldn't actually be 00:05:25.629 --> 00:05:28.170 the very best in traditional academics. So he 00:05:28.170 --> 00:05:30.790 made this highly pragmatic, logical calculation. 00:05:30.870 --> 00:05:34.750 He pivoted, focused on debating and drama areas 00:05:34.750 --> 00:05:37.149 where he had a chance of being the best. That's 00:05:37.149 --> 00:05:39.350 fascinating. It's not just a career change. It's 00:05:39.350 --> 00:05:42.230 the genesis of that analytical, system -driven 00:05:42.230 --> 00:05:45.230 mind applying logic to personal success. It's 00:05:45.230 --> 00:05:47.490 pure Mark Corrigan, really. It absolutely is. 00:05:47.610 --> 00:05:50.750 That need to excel rather than maybe pure passion 00:05:50.750 --> 00:05:53.040 for the arts driving him towards the stage. He 00:05:53.040 --> 00:05:55.259 recalled his earliest dramatic experience was 00:05:55.259 --> 00:05:57.160 winning the role of Rabbit in a production of 00:05:57.160 --> 00:05:59.379 Winnie the Pooh. Right. And the revelation he 00:05:59.379 --> 00:06:01.480 apparently took from that simple role is quite 00:06:01.480 --> 00:06:03.660 profound. He said that was the first time he 00:06:03.660 --> 00:06:06.300 was consciously aware he was doing a performance. 00:06:06.579 --> 00:06:09.639 And he realized that this activity was better 00:06:09.639 --> 00:06:13.220 even than playing cards. Better than cards. Which 00:06:13.220 --> 00:06:15.500 is key because he admitted he spent most of his 00:06:15.500 --> 00:06:18.420 downtime backstage during other plays doing his 00:06:18.420 --> 00:06:21.379 other highly systematized hobby, playing card 00:06:21.379 --> 00:06:24.389 games. So the moment performance actually superseded 00:06:24.389 --> 00:06:26.110 the intellectual challenge of playing cards. 00:06:26.829 --> 00:06:28.689 Well that was his true calling you could say. 00:06:28.990 --> 00:06:31.310 That tipping point then took him to Peterhouse, 00:06:31.490 --> 00:06:34.209 Cambridge, to study history. Although he got 00:06:34.209 --> 00:06:37.449 a 2 .2 degree class, he openly puts down to the 00:06:37.449 --> 00:06:40.370 distraction caused by his increasingly consuming 00:06:40.370 --> 00:06:43.089 pursuit of comedy. That obviously took precedence 00:06:43.089 --> 00:06:45.410 over the academic focus. Of course. And it was 00:06:45.410 --> 00:06:48.370 at Cambridge in 1993, during rehearsals for a 00:06:48.370 --> 00:06:50.350 Footlights production of Cinderella, of all things, 00:06:50.470 --> 00:06:53.589 that he met Robert Webb. And this partnership, 00:06:53.730 --> 00:06:55.829 well, it would define the next couple of decades 00:06:55.829 --> 00:06:58.350 of British comedy. Mitchell was heavily involved 00:06:58.350 --> 00:07:00.389 in the Cambridge Footlights, the esteemed comedy 00:07:00.389 --> 00:07:03.029 group there. He eventually got the coveted position 00:07:03.029 --> 00:07:06.470 of president for the 1995 -1996 academic year. 00:07:06.670 --> 00:07:08.689 And just for listeners who might not be steeped 00:07:08.689 --> 00:07:11.949 in UK comedy history, the Footlights is, I mean, 00:07:11.970 --> 00:07:13.889 it's effectively the primary talent pipeline 00:07:13.889 --> 00:07:16.589 for British satire and sketch comedy. Getting 00:07:16.589 --> 00:07:18.970 the presidency is a huge signal that you are 00:07:18.970 --> 00:07:21.850 a serious contender in the comedy world. Definitely 00:07:21.850 --> 00:07:24.829 a big deal. However, their initial foray into 00:07:24.829 --> 00:07:27.709 collaboration was... well, anything but successful. 00:07:28.050 --> 00:07:30.970 Their very first show together, January 1995, 00:07:31.529 --> 00:07:34.410 was titled Innocent Millions, Dead or Dying. 00:07:34.610 --> 00:07:37.529 A wry look at the post -apocalyptic age. Sounds 00:07:37.529 --> 00:07:40.790 intense. Intense, and by all accounts, an unmitigated 00:07:40.790 --> 00:07:43.329 disaster. Oh, dear. Roderick Webb's description 00:07:43.329 --> 00:07:45.209 of the show still stands as possibly the most 00:07:45.209 --> 00:07:47.110 brutally honest review ever published. He just 00:07:47.110 --> 00:07:50.790 called it fing terrible. Yeah, can't argue with 00:07:50.790 --> 00:07:54.800 that directness. That failure, this... highly 00:07:54.800 --> 00:07:58.139 intellectual, but clearly poorly executed piece 00:07:58.139 --> 00:08:00.540 of post -apocalyptic satire. It must have been 00:08:00.540 --> 00:08:02.720 a crucible for them, though, for developing their 00:08:02.720 --> 00:08:05.139 style. You'd think so. It shows that intellectual 00:08:05.139 --> 00:08:07.360 ambition alone isn't enough, right? You need 00:08:07.360 --> 00:08:11.579 stagecraft, pacing, actual comedic timing. But 00:08:11.579 --> 00:08:14.699 that shared experience, the shared flop, it cemented 00:08:14.699 --> 00:08:16.620 their bond. It allowed them to figure out what 00:08:16.620 --> 00:08:18.579 worked, even if that particular show really, 00:08:18.639 --> 00:08:20.949 really didn't. OK, so despite bombing their first 00:08:20.949 --> 00:08:23.670 show, the intellectual and comedic synchronicity 00:08:23.670 --> 00:08:26.149 was obviously there. Mitchell characterized their 00:08:26.149 --> 00:08:28.170 enduring professional relationship by noting 00:08:28.170 --> 00:08:30.569 they have superficial differences and underlying 00:08:30.569 --> 00:08:33.169 similarities. Crucially, they agree completely 00:08:33.169 --> 00:08:35.230 on what's funny and together they form a unit 00:08:35.230 --> 00:08:37.929 greater than the sum of our parts. And that synergy, 00:08:38.049 --> 00:08:40.370 that understanding, it sustained them through 00:08:40.370 --> 00:08:43.230 the lean years that followed. Before their big 00:08:43.230 --> 00:08:46.190 TV break, Mitchell endured that typical early 00:08:46.190 --> 00:08:48.970 career London grind. We see him ushering at the 00:08:48.970 --> 00:08:51.730 Lyric Hammersmith Theater and perhaps more memorably, 00:08:51.809 --> 00:08:54.509 working the cloakroom at that chaotic youth culture 00:08:54.509 --> 00:08:59.269 TV show, TFI Friday. Wow, TFI Friday. That must 00:08:59.269 --> 00:09:01.149 have been an experience. I can only imagine. 00:09:01.230 --> 00:09:03.289 These were those necessary, humbling, professional 00:09:03.289 --> 00:09:06.169 steps, weren't they? Definitely. They started 00:09:06.169 --> 00:09:08.769 finding success, though, not by performing initially, 00:09:09.029 --> 00:09:11.929 but by writing for others, which is often a slightly 00:09:11.929 --> 00:09:15.350 more stable pathway in comedy. True. They secured 00:09:15.350 --> 00:09:17.789 gigs writing for established duos like Alexander 00:09:17.789 --> 00:09:20.850 Armstrong and Ben Miller. They also contributed 00:09:20.850 --> 00:09:23.049 to the second series of the cult sketch show 00:09:23.049 --> 00:09:26.870 Big Train. Oh, Big Train. Great show. Yeah. And 00:09:26.870 --> 00:09:29.289 they got minor acting work, too, on early shows 00:09:29.289 --> 00:09:31.590 like The Jack Daugherty Show and Comedy Nation. 00:09:32.039 --> 00:09:34.200 small bits here and there. Their first proper 00:09:34.200 --> 00:09:36.460 television acting break where they actually had 00:09:36.460 --> 00:09:38.919 significant creative input was the BBC sketch 00:09:38.919 --> 00:09:42.100 show Bruiser in 2000. They primarily wrote it 00:09:42.100 --> 00:09:44.440 and starred in it. And critically, that show 00:09:44.440 --> 00:09:47.100 provided early screen time for some future heavy 00:09:47.100 --> 00:09:49.480 hitters. Martin Freeman was in it. And perhaps 00:09:49.480 --> 00:09:52.259 most importantly, Olivia Coleman, who then became 00:09:52.259 --> 00:09:55.899 this integral, recurring collaborator in basically 00:09:55.899 --> 00:09:58.019 all their future projects. Such a brilliant connection 00:09:58.019 --> 00:10:00.460 they have. They then secure their own dedicated 00:10:00.460 --> 00:10:03.080 platform in 2001 for the Mitchell and Webb situation. 00:10:03.679 --> 00:10:07.179 It ran for six episodes on the now defunct digital 00:10:07.179 --> 00:10:10.639 channel Play UK. Play UK, yeah. Gone but not 00:10:10.639 --> 00:10:13.440 forgotten by some. And this show, despite having 00:10:13.440 --> 00:10:16.799 a tiny audience base, it rapidly achieved genuine 00:10:16.799 --> 00:10:19.639 cult success. The critical praise for Situation 00:10:19.639 --> 00:10:22.379 was pretty overwhelming at the time. A lot of 00:10:22.379 --> 00:10:25.259 critics argued it was far superior to the vastly 00:10:25.259 --> 00:10:27.919 overrated Little Britain, which was huge then. 00:10:28.100 --> 00:10:30.879 Some even called it the greatest forgotten sketch 00:10:30.879 --> 00:10:33.840 show of modern times. My praise indeed. And this 00:10:33.840 --> 00:10:36.100 is where we see Mitchell's philosophy about quality 00:10:36.100 --> 00:10:39.169 overreach really solidify. He openly stated he 00:10:39.169 --> 00:10:41.289 was more proud of the way it turned out than 00:10:41.289 --> 00:10:43.429 annoyed that it was only aired on a small channel. 00:10:43.529 --> 00:10:45.809 This early commitment to artistic integrity, 00:10:46.070 --> 00:10:48.309 even in relative obscurity, I think that's a 00:10:48.309 --> 00:10:50.490 crucial note in his character arc. Definitely. 00:10:50.509 --> 00:10:52.629 But the true foundation for their mainstream 00:10:52.629 --> 00:10:55.590 success, that was built on BBC Radio 4, wasn't 00:10:55.590 --> 00:10:57.789 it? With that Mitchell and Webb sound. Absolutely. 00:10:58.070 --> 00:11:00.730 The radio format was perfect for their detailed 00:11:00.730 --> 00:11:03.509 dialogue -heavy humor. It ran for five series. 00:11:03.960 --> 00:11:06.639 won a Sony Silver Award. Impressive. And eventually 00:11:06.639 --> 00:11:09.259 provided the material backbone for the TV adaptation, 00:11:09.639 --> 00:11:12.100 the Mitchell and Webb look, which itself went 00:11:12.100 --> 00:11:14.960 on to win a BAFTA. So all of this creative momentum, 00:11:15.139 --> 00:11:18.200 it culminates in 2003 with their absolute masterpiece, 00:11:18.659 --> 00:11:21.279 Peep Show, Mitchell playing Mark Corrigan opposite 00:11:21.279 --> 00:11:24.159 Webb's Jeremy Osbourne. Jizz, yeah. And the show 00:11:24.159 --> 00:11:26.720 was instantly defined by its technical genius. 00:11:27.200 --> 00:11:29.799 That signature point of view camera work, the 00:11:29.799 --> 00:11:33.120 POV shots, which place the viewer literally inside 00:11:33.120 --> 00:11:35.539 the heads of the characters, hearing their thoughts. 00:11:35.720 --> 00:11:37.559 Yeah, the internal monologues. And this is where 00:11:37.559 --> 00:11:39.320 we really need to dive into Mitchell's performance 00:11:39.320 --> 00:11:42.399 specifically. That POV setup, it was more than 00:11:42.399 --> 00:11:45.220 just a gimmick, wasn't it? It gave this unparalleled 00:11:45.220 --> 00:11:48.100 comedic access to the anxiety, the internal judgment, 00:11:48.139 --> 00:11:50.559 the sheer markedness that defines Mitchell's 00:11:50.559 --> 00:11:54.379 persona. Totally. The genius of Peep Show is 00:11:54.379 --> 00:11:57.179 that juxtaposition between the characters' internal 00:11:57.179 --> 00:12:00.600 thoughts, which are often deeply flawed, misanthropic, 00:12:00.600 --> 00:12:03.419 you know. Hilariously petty. Exactly. And their 00:12:03.419 --> 00:12:06.340 external, usually socially awkward attempts to 00:12:06.340 --> 00:12:09.549 navigate everyday life. Mitchell, as Mark Corrigan, 00:12:09.649 --> 00:12:12.610 used that internal monologue brilliantly to convey 00:12:12.610 --> 00:12:15.870 layers of anxiety, self -loathing, and this incredibly 00:12:15.870 --> 00:12:18.590 sophisticated analysis of really trivial situations. 00:12:19.049 --> 00:12:21.990 Like the right way to eat toast. Precisely. The 00:12:21.990 --> 00:12:24.309 audience hears Mark's highly rational critique 00:12:24.309 --> 00:12:27.769 of others, his plans, his systems, only to watch 00:12:27.769 --> 00:12:30.169 him execute some deeply irrational or cowardly 00:12:30.169 --> 00:12:32.659 action just moments later. It allowed Mitchell 00:12:32.659 --> 00:12:34.980 to perform the exact sort of hyper -analytical 00:12:34.980 --> 00:12:37.360 thinking he'd cultivated since Abingdon, turning 00:12:37.360 --> 00:12:39.720 that internal struggle into pure comic gold. 00:12:39.940 --> 00:12:42.360 But the story of Peep Show's success is a classic 00:12:42.360 --> 00:12:44.700 one, isn't it? Critical darling versus commercial 00:12:44.700 --> 00:12:47.240 reality. Despite the show's immense quality, 00:12:47.539 --> 00:12:50.200 viewing figures were consistently low. Apparently, 00:12:50.279 --> 00:12:52.899 it was almost canceled after Series 3. It's crazy 00:12:52.899 --> 00:12:55.299 to think about now. But yeah, its critical acclaim 00:12:55.299 --> 00:12:57.460 essentially kept it alive. The industry recognized 00:12:57.460 --> 00:13:00.340 his genius. Ricky Gervais famously called it 00:13:00.340 --> 00:13:03.320 the best sitcom since Father Ted. High praise. 00:13:03.539 --> 00:13:05.840 Very high. And Mitchell's performance drew immense 00:13:05.840 --> 00:13:08.870 praise, too. The BBC noted that Mark Corrigan 00:13:08.870 --> 00:13:11.330 resonated with all those middle -aged men in 00:13:11.330 --> 00:13:13.850 a 20 -something's body who believe drugs are 00:13:13.850 --> 00:13:16.629 boring and systems are necessary if society is 00:13:16.629 --> 00:13:18.710 to function at all. Aha, perfect description. 00:13:18.990 --> 00:13:20.669 And Mitchell admitted he sympathized with Mark, 00:13:20.789 --> 00:13:23.830 saying he agrees with many of Mark's opinions. 00:13:24.169 --> 00:13:26.590 It suggests the character was a real extension 00:13:26.590 --> 00:13:29.629 of his own intellectual worldview, perhaps dialed 00:13:29.629 --> 00:13:32.039 up. And that dedication paid off. He won the 00:13:32.039 --> 00:13:34.899 BAFTA for Best Comedy Performance in 2009 for 00:13:34.899 --> 00:13:37.360 the role. That was after the show itself won 00:13:37.360 --> 00:13:39.379 the BAFTA for Best Situation Comedy in 2008. 00:13:40.080 --> 00:13:43.240 Deservedly so. Post -Peep Show, the duo kept 00:13:43.240 --> 00:13:45.279 collaborating, though maybe with more varied 00:13:45.279 --> 00:13:48.120 results. There was the film Magicians in 2007. 00:13:48.679 --> 00:13:50.980 Mixed reviews on that one. Yeah. The short -lived 00:13:50.980 --> 00:13:53.639 diplomatic satire Ambassadors in 2013. And then 00:13:53.639 --> 00:13:55.860 the critical success of the comedy -drama Back, 00:13:56.039 --> 00:13:58.480 which ran from 2017 to 2021. That was really 00:13:58.480 --> 00:14:01.210 good. Back was excellent, yes. They even voiced 00:14:01.210 --> 00:14:04.350 a robotic duo in a Doctor Who episode, Dinosaurs 00:14:04.350 --> 00:14:07.389 on a Spaceship, in 2012. Shows their synergy 00:14:07.389 --> 00:14:09.649 works even in, you know, sci -fi settings. Uh 00:14:09.649 --> 00:14:12.409 -huh, yeah. And looking forward, we're anticipating 00:14:12.409 --> 00:14:14.389 their return to sketch comedy with Mitchell and 00:14:14.389 --> 00:14:17.110 Webber not helping. Scheduled for 2025. Looking 00:14:17.110 --> 00:14:19.929 forward to that. But we absolutely cannot transition 00:14:19.929 --> 00:14:22.710 out of the duo's career without addressing the 00:14:22.710 --> 00:14:25.929 major controversy. The ethical, artistic storm 00:14:25.929 --> 00:14:29.159 that erupted in 2007. Their decision to star 00:14:29.159 --> 00:14:32.500 in the Apple Get a Mac advertisements. Mitchell 00:14:32.500 --> 00:14:35.320 playing the hapless sort of besieged PC character 00:14:35.320 --> 00:14:37.659 in the UK version of that campaign. Ah, yes. 00:14:37.759 --> 00:14:40.320 The Mac versus PC ads. That was a moment. This 00:14:40.320 --> 00:14:43.419 was when their core audience, often quite countercultural, 00:14:43.580 --> 00:14:45.840 really turned on them. They were instantly accused 00:14:45.840 --> 00:14:48.000 of selling their souls, committing an act of 00:14:48.000 --> 00:14:50.860 grave betrayal. The criticism, particularly from 00:14:50.860 --> 00:14:53.000 commentators like Charlie Brooker, was absolutely 00:14:53.000 --> 00:14:55.200 ferocious. Brooker's critique was fascinating, 00:14:55.379 --> 00:14:57.980 wasn't it? because it hinged entirely on their 00:14:57.980 --> 00:15:01.879 pre -established comic personas. He argued the 00:15:01.879 --> 00:15:04.899 ads failed because, in a Mitchell and Webb context, 00:15:05.240 --> 00:15:08.100 the Mac character, played by Webb, inevitably 00:15:08.100 --> 00:15:11.399 came across as a smug preening tosser. Which, 00:15:11.480 --> 00:15:13.340 let's be honest, Webb plays very well. He does. 00:15:13.620 --> 00:15:16.299 But that, in turn, made Mitchell's character 00:15:16.299 --> 00:15:20.590 PC look ultimately lovable and relatable. The 00:15:20.590 --> 00:15:22.629 audience was meant to laugh with the Mac and 00:15:22.629 --> 00:15:25.230 at the PC but their specific dynamic kind of 00:15:25.230 --> 00:15:28.139 reversed it. It created this dissonance and fed 00:15:28.139 --> 00:15:30.059 the idea that they'd compromise their artistic 00:15:30.059 --> 00:15:32.220 credibility for corporate money. It was that 00:15:32.220 --> 00:15:34.879 classic conflict, commercial pragmatism versus 00:15:34.879 --> 00:15:37.960 artistic purity. And their defense, which was 00:15:37.960 --> 00:15:40.639 trademark Mitchell and Webb, was ruthlessly logical 00:15:40.639 --> 00:15:43.860 and disarmingly pragmatic. It was almost a perfect 00:15:43.860 --> 00:15:46.039 Mark Corrigan justification, wasn't it? Robert 00:15:46.039 --> 00:15:47.980 Webb basically stated that when presented with 00:15:47.980 --> 00:15:50.159 a choice, do you want to do some funny ads for 00:15:50.159 --> 00:15:52.460 not many days in the year and be paid more than 00:15:52.460 --> 00:15:54.639 you would be for an entire series of peep show? 00:15:55.129 --> 00:15:56.909 Well, the answer was obviously yes. Can't really 00:15:56.909 --> 00:15:59.190 argue with the maths. The financial disparity 00:15:59.190 --> 00:16:02.289 was just enormous. It made the decision purely 00:16:02.289 --> 00:16:05.370 one of economic survival or at least significant 00:16:05.370 --> 00:16:08.129 financial gain in a challenging creative industry. 00:16:08.509 --> 00:16:10.610 Mitchell elaborated on the ethical side, too, 00:16:10.730 --> 00:16:13.470 kind of minimizing the emotional critique entirely. 00:16:13.929 --> 00:16:17.610 He argued he didn't see what was morally inconsistent 00:16:17.610 --> 00:16:20.610 with a comedian doing an advert. He said, it's 00:16:20.610 --> 00:16:22.429 all right to sell computers, isn't it? Unless 00:16:22.429 --> 00:16:24.809 you think that capitalism is evil, which I don't. 00:16:25.039 --> 00:16:27.379 It's not like we're helping to flog a baby killing 00:16:27.379 --> 00:16:31.279 machine. That is the ultimate cold logical defense 00:16:31.279 --> 00:16:33.539 of their position, isn't it? They acknowledged 00:16:33.539 --> 00:16:36.039 the economic necessity, minimized the artistic 00:16:36.039 --> 00:16:38.299 impact by saying advertising computers is ethically 00:16:38.299 --> 00:16:41.399 neutral, and basically sidestepped the core critique 00:16:41.399 --> 00:16:45.179 that their personas, which thrived on anti -establishment 00:16:45.179 --> 00:16:47.799 angst, made them ill -suited to front a major 00:16:47.799 --> 00:16:50.039 corporate campaign. It was a clear line drawn. 00:16:50.259 --> 00:16:52.559 We are performers. This is business. And you 00:16:52.559 --> 00:16:54.340 could argue that controversial decision actually 00:16:54.340 --> 00:16:56.379 funded a lot of the diverse work that followed 00:16:56.379 --> 00:16:58.960 for both of them. Quite possibly. And while the 00:16:58.960 --> 00:17:01.419 partnership continued, that financial injection 00:17:01.419 --> 00:17:03.720 certainly allowed Mitchell's solo career to truly 00:17:03.720 --> 00:17:07.420 flourish, particularly in that unforgiving, unscripted 00:17:07.420 --> 00:17:09.740 world of television panel shows. Right. This 00:17:09.740 --> 00:17:12.099 is the phase where Mitchell really cements his 00:17:12.099 --> 00:17:15.259 status in the public consciousness, earning him 00:17:15.259 --> 00:17:18.240 that nickname we mentioned. If not King, then 00:17:18.240 --> 00:17:21.099 certainly Prince Regent of the panel games. It 00:17:21.099 --> 00:17:24.359 fits so well. The sheer volume of his work in 00:17:24.359 --> 00:17:27.480 this spontaneous format is just staggering. And 00:17:27.480 --> 00:17:29.839 it's surely no coincidence that a man who excels 00:17:29.839 --> 00:17:32.809 at debating and logical systems totally dominates 00:17:32.809 --> 00:17:35.529 a genre built on rapid -fire argumentation and 00:17:35.529 --> 00:17:38.109 quick thinking. He's been a fixture for, what, 00:17:38.150 --> 00:17:40.410 nearly two decades now as a team captain on Would 00:17:40.410 --> 00:17:42.890 I Lie to You since 2007, where he essentially 00:17:42.890 --> 00:17:45.210 plays a slightly more polished version of the 00:17:45.210 --> 00:17:48.430 Mark Corrigan persona, skeptical, prepared, focused 00:17:48.430 --> 00:17:51.109 on logical consistency. And prone to those brilliant, 00:17:51.230 --> 00:17:53.289 indignant rants when he thinks someone's lying. 00:17:53.390 --> 00:17:56.109 Exactly. Beyond television, he's commanded the 00:17:56.109 --> 00:17:59.069 radio waves, too, hosting an astonishing 31 series 00:17:59.069 --> 00:18:01.730 of the BBC Radio 4 game The Unbelievable Truth. 00:18:02.190 --> 00:18:05.190 31 series. That's incredible stamina. And that 00:18:05.190 --> 00:18:07.450 show perfectly encapsulates his appeal, doesn't 00:18:07.450 --> 00:18:10.130 it? The entire premise is built on rigorous application 00:18:10.130 --> 00:18:13.390 of logic and knowledge to spot the one true statement 00:18:13.390 --> 00:18:16.269 hidden amongst a load of plausible but false 00:18:16.269 --> 00:18:19.289 claims. Perfect for him. And his ubiquity as 00:18:19.289 --> 00:18:22.170 a guest is just unparalleled. You mentioned Dave 00:18:22.170 --> 00:18:24.880 earlier. Well... He boasts 32 appearances on 00:18:24.880 --> 00:18:27.660 QI, the program devoted to obscure knowledge. 00:18:27.960 --> 00:18:30.059 He's guest presented Have I Got News For You 00:18:30.059 --> 00:18:33.019 14 times, often steering that satirical ship 00:18:33.019 --> 00:18:35.480 through choppy waters, and appeared nine times 00:18:35.480 --> 00:18:38.220 on the annual The Big Fat Quiz of the Year. If 00:18:38.220 --> 00:18:40.519 you watch British comedy panel shows, you simply 00:18:40.519 --> 00:18:42.940 cannot avoid David Mitchell. He is the panel 00:18:42.940 --> 00:18:45.059 show in many ways, and his dominance in this 00:18:45.059 --> 00:18:47.420 format is so comprehensive that he actually felt 00:18:47.420 --> 00:18:49.420 compelled to defend the genre itself against 00:18:49.420 --> 00:18:51.779 its critics, specifically addressing comments 00:18:51.779 --> 00:18:54.259 from Fast Show co -creator Charlie Higson, who'd 00:18:54.259 --> 00:18:56.500 suggested panel shows were kind of crowding out 00:18:56.500 --> 00:18:59.029 scripted comedy. Oh, that's interesting. And 00:18:59.029 --> 00:19:01.490 this defense is crucial because it uses his signature 00:19:01.490 --> 00:19:05.130 analytical style to justify his own career path, 00:19:05.369 --> 00:19:07.970 essentially. He argues that panel shows generate 00:19:07.970 --> 00:19:11.009 these unique, unscripted moments of comedy that 00:19:11.009 --> 00:19:13.390 you could never possibly craft or write into 00:19:13.390 --> 00:19:15.970 a sitcom or a sketch show. Right. And he used 00:19:15.970 --> 00:19:18.529 a perfect, specific anecdote to prove his point. 00:19:18.690 --> 00:19:21.690 It involved Catherine Zeta -Jones, bizarrely 00:19:21.690 --> 00:19:24.450 enough. Catherine Zeta -Jones. How did she come 00:19:24.450 --> 00:19:26.829 into it? Well, he recounted a situation on a 00:19:26.829 --> 00:19:28.970 show where someone quoted Catherine Zeta -Jones 00:19:28.970 --> 00:19:31.210 talking about playing golf with her husband, 00:19:31.390 --> 00:19:33.950 Michael Douglas. Mitchell explained that the 00:19:33.950 --> 00:19:35.950 spontaneous reaction of the panelists to that 00:19:35.950 --> 00:19:39.250 image was the true magic. He said, we essentially 00:19:39.250 --> 00:19:41.190 all started to imagine the scene of the two of 00:19:41.190 --> 00:19:43.269 them playing golf, and that was very enjoyable 00:19:43.269 --> 00:19:45.750 and turned into a really fun bit of TV. Okay, 00:19:45.809 --> 00:19:47.690 I can see that being funny. And his conclusion 00:19:47.690 --> 00:19:51.029 from this specific, quite trivial anecdote was 00:19:51.029 --> 00:19:53.900 powerful. It purely came out of that combination 00:19:53.900 --> 00:19:56.500 of people, which proves panel shows can produce 00:19:56.500 --> 00:19:58.279 funny TV in a way you could never write into 00:19:58.279 --> 00:20:01.039 a sitcom or a sketch show and thereby justifies 00:20:01.039 --> 00:20:03.559 its place on screen. That is the ultimate example 00:20:03.559 --> 00:20:06.180 of the historian and analyst applying critical 00:20:06.180 --> 00:20:08.779 theory to the very entertainment mechanism he 00:20:08.779 --> 00:20:11.640 rules. He doesn't just dominate the panel show. 00:20:11.740 --> 00:20:15.259 He rationalizes its existence. Brilliant. Absolutely. 00:20:15.380 --> 00:20:18.240 Now. Transitioning from the panel format, his 00:20:18.240 --> 00:20:20.779 solo acting career also found immense success, 00:20:21.099 --> 00:20:23.960 often leaning into historical themes, interestingly 00:20:23.960 --> 00:20:27.259 enough. Yes, Upstart Crow. Exactly. He played 00:20:27.259 --> 00:20:29.160 William Shakespeare in the critically acclaimed 00:20:29.160 --> 00:20:32.200 historical sitcom Upstart Crow from 2016 to 2020. 00:20:32.680 --> 00:20:35.140 That show was created to mark the 400th anniversary 00:20:35.140 --> 00:20:37.420 of the playwright's death, and it allowed Mitchell 00:20:37.420 --> 00:20:40.140 to play an anxious, often curmudgeonly historical 00:20:40.140 --> 00:20:42.759 figure, echoing some traits of Mark Corrigan 00:20:42.759 --> 00:20:44.779 perhaps, but in Tudor dress. And he took that 00:20:44.779 --> 00:20:46.619 role to the stage as well, didn't he? Making 00:20:46.619 --> 00:20:49.279 his stage debut, reprising the Shakespeare character 00:20:49.279 --> 00:20:52.859 in 2020 and again in 2022, shows his versatility 00:20:52.859 --> 00:20:55.380 across mediums. Definitely. And we saw him take 00:20:55.380 --> 00:20:57.779 a significant new direction just recently, in 00:20:57.779 --> 00:21:00.819 2024, with the BBC One detective comedy drama 00:21:00.819 --> 00:21:03.079 Ludwig. Yes, I heard good things about that. 00:21:03.259 --> 00:21:06.660 In Ludwig, he plays John Ludwig Taylor, a man 00:21:06.660 --> 00:21:08.599 who assumes the identity of his missing identical 00:21:08.599 --> 00:21:11.400 twin. It's a much more dramatic comedic role, 00:21:11.519 --> 00:21:14.460 apparently. Early reviews were stellar, praising 00:21:14.460 --> 00:21:17.259 his dramatic range. One even suggested they should 00:21:17.259 --> 00:21:20.259 just give him the BAFTA now. High praise again. 00:21:20.420 --> 00:21:23.059 It indicates an ongoing evolution, then, of his 00:21:23.059 --> 00:21:25.799 acting prowess, moving beyond just the anxious 00:21:25.799 --> 00:21:28.539 internal monologue characters he perfected earlier. 00:21:29.019 --> 00:21:31.680 Seems so. We also have to acknowledge his significant 00:21:31.680 --> 00:21:35.140 output as sort of an opinion shaper. He contributes 00:21:35.140 --> 00:21:37.759 regular opinion pieces to The Observer and The 00:21:37.759 --> 00:21:41.019 Guardian. Very widely read columns. Yes. And 00:21:41.019 --> 00:21:43.079 he was a co -host of that comedy news show 10 00:21:43.079 --> 00:21:46.839 o 'clock live from 2011 to 2013, which included 00:21:46.839 --> 00:21:49.980 his highly popular solo opinion segment. Listen 00:21:49.980 --> 00:21:51.900 to Mitchell. Those are great. They really were 00:21:51.900 --> 00:21:54.099 proper rants. He was an early doctor of online 00:21:54.099 --> 00:21:55.859 video commentary, too, wasn't he? With the David 00:21:55.859 --> 00:21:57.940 Mitchell soapbox series. Yeah, those short online 00:21:57.940 --> 00:22:00.019 monologues co -written with John Thinnamore, 00:22:00.079 --> 00:22:02.319 another brilliant writer. These videos. where 00:22:02.319 --> 00:22:05.059 he often launched into these extended, passionate 00:22:05.059 --> 00:22:07.000 rants about subjects like the failings of Doctor 00:22:07.000 --> 00:22:09.660 Who or the absurdity of 3D television. Oh, I 00:22:09.660 --> 00:22:12.500 remember the 3D TV one. They were a direct pipeline 00:22:12.500 --> 00:22:15.500 for his trademark curmudgeonly persona to reach 00:22:15.500 --> 00:22:18.329 a wider, maybe younger audience online. And we 00:22:18.329 --> 00:22:21.009 can't forget the pervasive voiceover work, often 00:22:21.009 --> 00:22:24.109 lending his distinctive, measured, slightly exasperated 00:22:24.109 --> 00:22:26.670 tone to quite surprising projects. Like the frank 00:22:26.670 --> 00:22:30.150 anti -cocaine advert voicing Pablo the drug mule 00:22:30.150 --> 00:22:33.509 dog. Memorable stuff. Very memorable. And even 00:22:33.509 --> 00:22:35.390 educational material for the driving standards 00:22:35.390 --> 00:22:38.369 agency's The Highway Code. His voice is everywhere. 00:22:38.730 --> 00:22:41.750 It really is. But perhaps the most profound solo 00:22:41.750 --> 00:22:44.809 pivot came with his literary career. After co 00:22:44.809 --> 00:22:46.869 -authoring this Mitchell & Webb book and publishing 00:22:46.869 --> 00:22:49.769 personal memoirs like Backstory, a memoir and 00:22:49.769 --> 00:22:52.230 essay collections like Dishonesty is the second 00:22:52.230 --> 00:22:55.049 best policy, he truly found his stride in nonfiction 00:22:55.049 --> 00:22:58.029 history. Yes, this is where the old history degree 00:22:58.029 --> 00:23:00.410 really pays off, isn't it? Bringing that Abingdon 00:23:00.410 --> 00:23:03.769 ambition full circle, in a way. His 2023 history 00:23:03.769 --> 00:23:06.730 book, Unruly. A history of England's kings and 00:23:06.730 --> 00:23:08.569 queens covering the monarchy up to Elizabeth 00:23:08.569 --> 00:23:11.990 I was a runaway success. It really was. Widely 00:23:11.990 --> 00:23:13.990 acclaimed, got a 45 -star rating from the Daily 00:23:13.990 --> 00:23:17.309 Telegraph. And the book is this brilliant fusion 00:23:17.309 --> 00:23:20.349 of his interests. It's rigorously researched 00:23:20.349 --> 00:23:22.869 history, but delivered with his distinctive, 00:23:23.089 --> 00:23:26.299 skeptical, and often hilarious voice. It focuses 00:23:26.299 --> 00:23:28.519 quite intensely on the incompetence, doesn't 00:23:28.519 --> 00:23:31.019 it? The folly, the sheer human error of early 00:23:31.019 --> 00:23:33.839 monarchs. Exactly. It allows him to apply his 00:23:33.839 --> 00:23:36.700 lifelong fascination with system failure to the 00:23:36.700 --> 00:23:39.700 highest levels of historical power. And the success 00:23:39.700 --> 00:23:41.920 of the book... which led to a national tour, 00:23:42.140 --> 00:23:45.039 it really solidified his role, not just as a 00:23:45.039 --> 00:23:47.500 comedian, but as a respected public historian 00:23:47.500 --> 00:23:50.259 and cultural commentator. It's fascinating, isn't 00:23:50.259 --> 00:23:52.480 it? The man who apparently once wanted to be 00:23:52.480 --> 00:23:54.660 prime minister ends up writing a bestseller detailing 00:23:54.660 --> 00:23:57.279 exactly why people in power are almost universally 00:23:57.279 --> 00:24:00.279 terrible at their jobs. The comedic system built 00:24:00.279 --> 00:24:02.640 upon the failure of the political system. Perfectly 00:24:02.640 --> 00:24:05.200 put. The irony is palpable. Hashtag tag, hashtag, 00:24:05.240 --> 00:24:08.960 personal life influences and worldview. Okay, 00:24:09.000 --> 00:24:10.920 so moving into Mitchell's personal life a bit, 00:24:10.960 --> 00:24:12.880 he's often used his younger social struggles 00:24:12.880 --> 00:24:15.180 for comedic fodder, hasn't he? Joking about his 00:24:15.180 --> 00:24:17.299 earlier difficulty expressing romantic interest. 00:24:17.660 --> 00:24:20.960 Yeah, admitting he was in so many situations 00:24:20.960 --> 00:24:23.000 when I've just said nothing to someone I fancied. 00:24:23.319 --> 00:24:25.859 Quite relatable for many, I suspect. Probably. 00:24:26.160 --> 00:24:29.240 He also acknowledged his capacity for self -sufficiency, 00:24:29.460 --> 00:24:31.779 confessing that while he didn't want to be alone 00:24:31.779 --> 00:24:34.220 forever, the fundamental thing was that he was 00:24:34.220 --> 00:24:37.230 all right alone. This self -contained existence 00:24:37.230 --> 00:24:40.049 apparently continued until he met his wife, Victoria 00:24:40.049 --> 00:24:42.329 Corrin Mitchell. Right. And the origin of their 00:24:42.329 --> 00:24:44.210 relationship is surprisingly sweet, actually, 00:24:44.250 --> 00:24:46.829 considering his generally skeptical public persona. 00:24:47.250 --> 00:24:49.710 He met the broadcaster and professional poker 00:24:49.710 --> 00:24:52.789 player Victoria Corrin at Jonathan Ross's Halloween 00:24:52.789 --> 00:24:56.650 party back in 2007. A Halloween party? Yes. And 00:24:56.650 --> 00:24:59.789 was apparently completely smitten. Though they 00:24:59.789 --> 00:25:01.990 didn't immediately start dating. He later joked 00:25:01.990 --> 00:25:03.609 about initially pursuing someone else at the 00:25:03.609 --> 00:25:06.390 party. Rather awkwardly. Oh, David. But they 00:25:06.390 --> 00:25:08.769 began a formal relationship in 2010 and married 00:25:08.769 --> 00:25:11.009 in 2012. And it was a lovely professional full 00:25:11.009 --> 00:25:12.890 circle moment, too, wasn't it? Right. Robert 00:25:12.890 --> 00:25:15.589 Webb served as his best man. That's right. And 00:25:15.589 --> 00:25:18.609 they now have two daughters, born in 2015 and 00:25:18.609 --> 00:25:21.829 just recently in 2023. Grounding the Prince Regent 00:25:21.829 --> 00:25:24.740 firmly in family life. When we look at his artistic 00:25:24.740 --> 00:25:27.680 influences, they offer a key insight, I think, 00:25:27.700 --> 00:25:29.880 into the kind of performer he maybe aims to be. 00:25:30.039 --> 00:25:32.119 His favorite actor, apparently, is Alec Guinness. 00:25:32.200 --> 00:25:36.140 Ah, Guinness. A master of subtle, nuanced character 00:25:36.140 --> 00:25:40.150 work. That internal life. which parallels not 00:25:40.150 --> 00:25:42.450 only with the internal monologues of Mark Corrigan, 00:25:42.509 --> 00:25:45.470 perhaps. Good point. His comedy idols are absolute 00:25:45.470 --> 00:25:47.809 legends, known for their intellectual wit and 00:25:47.809 --> 00:25:51.089 often dark satire. Spike Milligan, Peter Sellers, 00:25:51.109 --> 00:25:54.190 Peter Cook. The greats. He also cited Richard 00:25:54.190 --> 00:25:56.690 Breyers, saying that whenever he has acted, he 00:25:56.690 --> 00:25:59.210 always hoped to be something like him. And Breyers 00:25:59.210 --> 00:26:01.470 was known for playing those anxious, mild -mannered, 00:26:01.490 --> 00:26:04.329 often frustrated characters. Another clear link 00:26:04.329 --> 00:26:06.670 there. He also cites the foundational duos of 00:26:06.670 --> 00:26:10.329 British comedy. More Cam and Wise, Monty Python, 00:26:10.630 --> 00:26:13.150 the two Ronnies, the absolute pillars. Can't 00:26:13.150 --> 00:26:15.289 go wrong with those influences. Outside of his 00:26:15.289 --> 00:26:17.589 career, his intellectual curiosity remains firmly 00:26:17.589 --> 00:26:20.029 focused on world history, doesn't it? Harking 00:26:20.029 --> 00:26:22.509 right back to his university studies. Yeah, and 00:26:22.509 --> 00:26:24.309 his humor often overlaps with this interest. 00:26:24.630 --> 00:26:27.250 He joked back in 2007 that if he had a time machine, 00:26:27.430 --> 00:26:29.690 he wouldn't seek out glorious historical moments. 00:26:30.349 --> 00:26:32.890 He'd traveled to Stonehenge during its construction. 00:26:33.109 --> 00:26:35.500 Stonehenge. A stone itch. Apparently just to 00:26:35.500 --> 00:26:37.839 ask the builders why they were bothering. Uh 00:26:37.839 --> 00:26:40.759 -huh. That absolutely encapsulates his entire 00:26:40.759 --> 00:26:43.200 worldview, doesn't it? Skeptical, questioning 00:26:43.200 --> 00:26:45.319 the practical necessity of grand traditional 00:26:45.319 --> 00:26:48.079 endeavors, focusing on the underlying human effort 00:26:48.079 --> 00:26:50.859 and maybe absurdity involved. Exactly. He identifies 00:26:50.859 --> 00:26:53.980 as agnostic, cites Evelyn Waugh as his favorite 00:26:53.980 --> 00:26:56.380 author, which also fits the satirical, slightly 00:26:56.380 --> 00:26:59.160 detached viewpoint. And for a man who analyzes 00:26:59.160 --> 00:27:01.740 everything so intently, his revealed musical 00:27:01.740 --> 00:27:04.920 tastes are, well, Remarkably modest, almost comical. 00:27:05.000 --> 00:27:07.619 He revealed on Desert Island Discs back in 2009 00:27:07.619 --> 00:27:10.380 that he only owned two albums at the time. Go 00:27:10.380 --> 00:27:13.680 on. Phil Collins' easy -listening classic, but 00:27:13.680 --> 00:27:16.680 seriously. Okay. And Susan Boyle's chart -topping 00:27:16.680 --> 00:27:20.430 debut. I dream to dream. Wow. OK. Unexpected. 00:27:20.569 --> 00:27:23.130 Very. Finally, we should touch on his political 00:27:23.130 --> 00:27:25.390 perspective, which is often conveyed through 00:27:25.390 --> 00:27:28.630 those widely read columns. And as mandated by 00:27:28.630 --> 00:27:31.210 our sources, we'll just impartially report that 00:27:31.210 --> 00:27:33.309 he has been quite vocal about maintaining the 00:27:33.309 --> 00:27:36.069 British Union. Right. He was among the signatories 00:27:36.069 --> 00:27:39.130 of an open letter back in August 2014, urging 00:27:39.130 --> 00:27:41.150 Scotland to vote to remain part of the United 00:27:41.150 --> 00:27:43.509 Kingdom in the independence referendum that year. 00:27:43.670 --> 00:27:47.220 Yes. And his reasoning. which seems tied directly 00:27:47.220 --> 00:27:50.099 to his own multilayered heritage, the Welsh and 00:27:50.099 --> 00:27:52.500 Scottish roots we discussed, was expressed in 00:27:52.500 --> 00:27:56.220 a 2011 column. He stated that if Scotland ever 00:27:56.220 --> 00:27:58.680 goes it alone, the British will have lost their 00:27:58.680 --> 00:28:01.740 country. He clearly views the political union 00:28:01.740 --> 00:28:05.000 as inextricably linked to that cultural concept 00:28:05.000 --> 00:28:07.279 of British identity that he himself embodies. 00:28:07.640 --> 00:28:09.880 Hashtag tag outro. OK, so let's bring all this 00:28:09.880 --> 00:28:11.680 together then. We've traced David Mitchell's 00:28:11.680 --> 00:28:13.859 journey. From the historically minded student 00:28:13.859 --> 00:28:17.099 who pivoted his career after realizing he couldn't 00:28:17.099 --> 00:28:19.140 be the top academic. Right, the Abingdon moment. 00:28:19.279 --> 00:28:22.299 To the man who cultivated that analytical drive 00:28:22.299 --> 00:28:26.019 into this huge multi -platform career. He found 00:28:26.019 --> 00:28:29.000 success in the anxious, critically acclaimed 00:28:29.000 --> 00:28:32.380 world of Peep Show and then scaled up to completely 00:28:32.380 --> 00:28:35.180 dominate the spontaneous logical challenges of 00:28:35.180 --> 00:28:37.759 panel games. His career really is a roadmap of 00:28:37.759 --> 00:28:40.539 intellectual synthesis, isn't it? He successfully 00:28:40.539 --> 00:28:43.400 merged the rigorous analytical side of the history 00:28:43.400 --> 00:28:46.839 student with the comedic persona of the anxious 00:28:46.839 --> 00:28:50.119 yet supremely articulate curmudgeon. And he managed 00:28:50.119 --> 00:28:52.200 to sustain the critically acclaimed peep show 00:28:52.200 --> 00:28:54.880 for over a decade while simultaneously becoming 00:28:54.880 --> 00:28:57.720 the improvisational intellectual anchor on, well, 00:28:57.799 --> 00:29:00.480 dozens of mainstream panel shows. It's quite 00:29:00.480 --> 00:29:02.640 the balancing act. It really is. And his relevance 00:29:02.640 --> 00:29:05.059 is far from fading. We mentioned the new detective 00:29:05.059 --> 00:29:07.579 series Ludwig. We're keenly anticipating the 00:29:07.579 --> 00:29:10.200 new Mitchell and Webb sketch show, Mitchell and 00:29:10.200 --> 00:29:13.119 Webb Are Not Helping, in 2025. Yeah, can't wait 00:29:13.119 --> 00:29:14.980 for that. And in a slightly surprising move, 00:29:15.079 --> 00:29:17.480 he's joining the cast of LOL Last One Laughing 00:29:17.480 --> 00:29:21.160 UK Series 2 in 2026. Oh, wow. That's an environment 00:29:21.160 --> 00:29:23.559 built on chaotic improvisation and suppressing 00:29:23.559 --> 00:29:25.799 laughter. That should severely test his systems 00:29:25.799 --> 00:29:28.440 -obsessed nature. Uh -huh. It should be fascinating 00:29:28.440 --> 00:29:32.079 viewing. He truly is a constant presence. And 00:29:32.079 --> 00:29:34.200 here is the final provocative thought we wanted 00:29:34.200 --> 00:29:37.200 to leave you with today. David Mischel, the Prince 00:29:37.200 --> 00:29:40.019 Regent of panel games, a man defined by systems, 00:29:40.200 --> 00:29:43.619 logic, intellectual consistency. He found his 00:29:43.619 --> 00:29:47.019 greatest... Recent nonfiction success documenting 00:29:47.019 --> 00:29:50.440 the inherent failure and incompetence of England's 00:29:50.440 --> 00:29:54.079 early monarchs in his book Unruly. Hmm. So what 00:29:54.079 --> 00:29:56.460 does this say about the modern British appetite, 00:29:56.599 --> 00:29:59.200 perhaps? That the public is most satisfied when 00:29:59.200 --> 00:30:00.980 the nation's leading intellectual comic voice 00:30:00.980 --> 00:30:04.180 is, well, humorously detailing centuries of systemic 00:30:04.180 --> 00:30:06.980 error, political folly, and just utter mismanagement? 00:30:07.099 --> 00:30:09.700 Maybe. That combination, the historical context, 00:30:09.940 --> 00:30:12.220 the sharp analysis, and that perpetual articulated 00:30:12.220 --> 00:30:14.539 skepticism, that seems to be the fundamental 00:30:14.539 --> 00:30:17.140 key to the Mitchell appeal. The man who pivoted 00:30:17.140 --> 00:30:19.079 away from being the best student ended up becoming 00:30:19.079 --> 00:30:20.940 one of the most intellectually necessary and 00:30:20.940 --> 00:30:23.359 compelling figures in British cultural commentary 00:30:23.359 --> 00:30:25.660 and comedy today. He found his niche perhaps 00:30:25.660 --> 00:30:28.099 by making the failures of the world digestible, 00:30:28.240 --> 00:30:30.799 funny, and, well, systematic. Perfectly put. 00:30:30.920 --> 00:30:34.079 Thank you for diving deep with us into the world 00:30:34.079 --> 00:30:36.039 of David Mitchell. We'll catch you next time 00:30:36.039 --> 00:30:37.039 on The Deep Dive.