What do you think?
Rate this book
Saints and Avengers: British Adventure Series of the 1960s
Series like ""The Avengers"" and ""Danger Man"", with their professional secret agents, or ""The Saint"" and ""The Persuaders"", featuring flamboyant crime-fighters, still inspire mainstream and cult followings. Saints and Avengers explores and celebrates this unique television genre for the first time. James Chapman uses case studies to look at the thrillers’ representations of national identity, and the world of the '60's and '70's. Chapman also asserts that this particular type of thriller was a historically and culturally defined generic type, with enduring appeal, as the current vogue for remaking them as big budget films attests.
296 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2002
1 person is currently reading
15 people want to read
About the author
James Chapman
27 books7 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author with this name in the Goodreads database.
James Chapman is Professor of Film Studies at the University of Leicester. He has written several books on the history of British popular culture, including work on cinema, television and comics.
He attended Wales High School during the 1980s. He took his BA (History) and MA (Film Studies) at the University of East Anglia and then undertook his doctoral research at Lancaster University, completing his thesis on the role of official film propaganda in Britain during the Second World War.
In 1996 he joined The Open University where he taught a broad range of undergraduate and postgraduate courses and was principal contributing author to the university’s first dedicated course on Film and Television History. He joined the University of Leicester as its founding Professor of Film Studies in 2005.
Chapman’s research focuses on British popular culture, especially cinema and television in their historical contexts. He has written or edited ten books, including two which he has co-authored with Professor Nicholas J. Cull. His work draws upon the ideas of the film theorist Gilles Deleuze and applies them to understanding the role and nature of popular film and television. His books include studies of the science fiction television series Doctor Who and the James Bond films. SFX magazine described his book Licence To Thrill as "thoughtful, intelligent, ludicrous and a bit snobby - bit like Bond really".
He is a Council member of the International Association for Media and History (IAMHIST) and is editor of the Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television.
Chapman has also published articles in the following journals: Screen, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Journal of Popular British Cinema, Visual Culture in Britain, Journal of Contemporary History, Contemporary British History, Media History and European Journal of Cultural Studies.
James Chapman is Professor of Film Studies at the University of Leicester. He has written several books on the history of British popular culture, including work on cinema, television and comics.
He attended Wales High School during the 1980s. He took his BA (History) and MA (Film Studies) at the University of East Anglia and then undertook his doctoral research at Lancaster University, completing his thesis on the role of official film propaganda in Britain during the Second World War.
In 1996 he joined The Open University where he taught a broad range of undergraduate and postgraduate courses and was principal contributing author to the university’s first dedicated course on Film and Television History. He joined the University of Leicester as its founding Professor of Film Studies in 2005.
Chapman’s research focuses on British popular culture, especially cinema and television in their historical contexts. He has written or edited ten books, including two which he has co-authored with Professor Nicholas J. Cull. His work draws upon the ideas of the film theorist Gilles Deleuze and applies them to understanding the role and nature of popular film and television. His books include studies of the science fiction television series Doctor Who and the James Bond films. SFX magazine described his book Licence To Thrill as "thoughtful, intelligent, ludicrous and a bit snobby - bit like Bond really".
He is a Council member of the International Association for Media and History (IAMHIST) and is editor of the Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television.
Chapman has also published articles in the following journals: Screen, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Journal of Popular British Cinema, Visual Culture in Britain, Journal of Contemporary History, Contemporary British History, Media History and European Journal of Cultural Studies.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
February 20, 2021
Tv Shows covered: Danger Man, The Avengers, The Saint, Adam Adamant Lives!, Man in a Suitcase, The Champions, Department S, Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased), Jason King, The Persuaders!
Note, this is "Intended for use on television and media studies courses". In other words - all fun has been removed from the text. A big mistake in my opinion as i'm sure this could have been more accessible and would sell better if not targeting such a niche audience. Having said that, it is interesting and I learned a lot, but it was a slog to finish. Ten TV shows reviewed is a lot for one book.
What I did not like is the number of episode plots covered and how they end. It slows the pace of the book and If you have not seen the episodes, spoiler alert, knowing the endings is not great.
Note, this is "Intended for use on television and media studies courses". In other words - all fun has been removed from the text. A big mistake in my opinion as i'm sure this could have been more accessible and would sell better if not targeting such a niche audience. Having said that, it is interesting and I learned a lot, but it was a slog to finish. Ten TV shows reviewed is a lot for one book.
What I did not like is the number of episode plots covered and how they end. It slows the pace of the book and If you have not seen the episodes, spoiler alert, knowing the endings is not great.
June 23, 2008
James Chapman tells us in the preface to Saints and Avengers: British Adventure Series of the 1960s that he's a cultural historian rather than a cultural theorist, and one of the most interesting things about the book is the way we see these programs reflecting political and social trends of the times, especially the decline of Britain as a major power and the decolonialisation of the British Empire.
Chapman tells us a lot about the production histories of the various programs, and the apparent intentions of the producers. There was a widespread belief in the British television industry in the 60s that if you wanted to sell TV shows to the American market you had to make them seem fairly American. But in fact the series that were most successful in the US, The Saint and The Avengers, were the most quintessentially English of all. And the program that tried hardest to be American, or at least transatlantic, The Persuaders, flopped in the US. Not really surprising when you think about it - why would American audiences want to see American-style programs made in Britain when they had so many American-made American-style programs they could watch? The Saint and The Avengers would have seemed exotic, and therefore interesting.
His comparison between The Champions and Department S is fascinating. He maintains that The Champions had a wildly implausible premise, but the individual stories were realist in style. Department S had a completely plausible premise, but the stories were outrageously implausible and non-realist in style. And the characters in The Champions were super heroes, but were played straight, while the characters in Department S were ordinary human beings but you had Peter Wyngarde playing Jason King in an outlandishly camp and totally over-the-top style.
The book has inspired me to add Man in a Suitcase to my rental queue, and it's made me particularly keen to watch The Champions and Department S again. A fascinating book. If you love the TV of the 60s you really need to read this book.
Chapman tells us a lot about the production histories of the various programs, and the apparent intentions of the producers. There was a widespread belief in the British television industry in the 60s that if you wanted to sell TV shows to the American market you had to make them seem fairly American. But in fact the series that were most successful in the US, The Saint and The Avengers, were the most quintessentially English of all. And the program that tried hardest to be American, or at least transatlantic, The Persuaders, flopped in the US. Not really surprising when you think about it - why would American audiences want to see American-style programs made in Britain when they had so many American-made American-style programs they could watch? The Saint and The Avengers would have seemed exotic, and therefore interesting.
His comparison between The Champions and Department S is fascinating. He maintains that The Champions had a wildly implausible premise, but the individual stories were realist in style. Department S had a completely plausible premise, but the stories were outrageously implausible and non-realist in style. And the characters in The Champions were super heroes, but were played straight, while the characters in Department S were ordinary human beings but you had Peter Wyngarde playing Jason King in an outlandishly camp and totally over-the-top style.
The book has inspired me to add Man in a Suitcase to my rental queue, and it's made me particularly keen to watch The Champions and Department S again. A fascinating book. If you love the TV of the 60s you really need to read this book.
January 6, 2014
An academic book about four of my ten favorite TV shows? Bring that on!
Alas, this book is disappointing. The author sets out to contextualize and analyze ten programs, noting the cultural and business conditions that produced them, their genre ties and the ways that some programs pushed those genres in new directions, and how the longer running shows evolved over the years. Three of the shows take up over the half the book. With a few quibbles, Chapman does very well by these shows. The other seven are not treated in the depth that they deserve. While it is true that some of the spade work was already accomplished in the earlier chapters, it it also true that DEPARTMENT S, for example, is given superficial treatment.
The book has several flaws and mistakes. The one that matters most is the muddle Chapman creates by showing that the series RANDALL AND HOPKIRK (DECEASED) was doomed to fail because the genres mixed (private eye and ghost story) are fundamentally incompatible, but then turns around and praises the nineties remake. Are the genres fundamentally incompatible, or not?
I do recommend the book on the basis of the first three chapters and the introduction, the useful information that is given for the other seven shows, and because Chapman is such a good writer that even his most superficial treatments are fun to read.
Alas, this book is disappointing. The author sets out to contextualize and analyze ten programs, noting the cultural and business conditions that produced them, their genre ties and the ways that some programs pushed those genres in new directions, and how the longer running shows evolved over the years. Three of the shows take up over the half the book. With a few quibbles, Chapman does very well by these shows. The other seven are not treated in the depth that they deserve. While it is true that some of the spade work was already accomplished in the earlier chapters, it it also true that DEPARTMENT S, for example, is given superficial treatment.
The book has several flaws and mistakes. The one that matters most is the muddle Chapman creates by showing that the series RANDALL AND HOPKIRK (DECEASED) was doomed to fail because the genres mixed (private eye and ghost story) are fundamentally incompatible, but then turns around and praises the nineties remake. Are the genres fundamentally incompatible, or not?
I do recommend the book on the basis of the first three chapters and the introduction, the useful information that is given for the other seven shows, and because Chapman is such a good writer that even his most superficial treatments are fun to read.
April 4, 2007
Puts into historic context the British TV series of the 1960s, several of which (like the Avengers & Secret Agent Man) made it to US television. If you enjoyed these shows the book is quite engaging, in that it both explores the stories in them and the stories surrounding them in the world of the time.
September 14, 2012
Excellent cultural and historical overview of some iconic British (note to American reviewers, they were British, NOT English) television shows. Fascinating perspectives and I particularly enjoyed the contexts of the various production histories. Well worth reading.
© Koplowitz 2012
© Koplowitz 2012
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews