The People vs Jeremy Clarkson

Is it just sandal-wearing, tree-hugging Lefties who have had enough of engine-revving, insult-throwing libertarian Jeremy Clarkson? No, says Oliver Bennett. Denouncements are coming from all directions

Jeremy Clarkson thrives on notoriety, but even he must be wondering at the rate at which he is acquiring enemies. Not a week goes by without somebody - or some group - denouncing him. They may just be guilty of rising to the bait, but the car-loving controversialist now stands accused like no other public figure - unwittingly (or perhaps not) of uniting an unlikely alliance of Clarkson-detesters: Members of Parliament, Piers Morgan, rural protectionists, animal-lovers, style-watchers, cyclists, inhabitants of Norfolk and many others.

Last week was typical. He turns up in The Sunday Times, mucking about on a tank in the Iraqi desert. Cue outrage from those who think a war zone is no place for such antics, especially not that war zone.

All the while Clarkson has ringing in his ears an early-day motion tabled by two Liberal Democrat MPs - Norman Baker and Tom Brake - who wanted him summoned to the House to explain "a curious and misguided attitude to the real and major threat posed by climate change".

It's not long since Clarkson fell foul of conservationists by driving a 4x4 through a Scottish peat bog. It was a precious and vulnerable area of rural Britain - awareness of which had either passed Clarkson by completely or failed to concern him.

To road safety campaigners the motormouth presenter of Top Gear on BBC2 is an irresponsible glamoriser of speed. That doesn't mean that car manufacturers like him. When MG Rover collapsed this year and Clarkson wrote: "When I heard the news my first thought was 'Good'," workers hung a banner outside the plant proclaiming an "Anti-Clarkson Campaign".

Although for some people he's acquired an unmistakeable love-to-hate quality, it's also true that he is very popular among a segment of British society. He is articulate, his books sell well, and he has a certain downbeat élan. His appearance in the BBC's hit genealogy series Who Do You Think You Are? confirmed him as one of the Corporation's A-list performers, very much with his own constituency.

"Yes, he's articulate," says Ben Stewart of Greenpeace. "He's articulating a highly moronic viewpoint. We have to acknowledge that he has clout." And that's why, he says, it's still worth complaining about him.

The tank-driving in Iraq stunt was certainly worthy of the man who drove into a tree in Somerset to demonstrate its strength.

The sophisticated might paint him as a Shakespearean fool for our era, clearing the air of pomposity, exposing the vain, and indulging an old English taste for mock offence. "You might say, 'He's got his tongue in his cheek so why worry?'" says Roger Geffen of the CTC, the national cyclists' organisation. "And fair enough, most people won't take him seriously. The trouble is that some will."

Another high point in Clarkson's infamy came earlier this year, when he was "pied" while receiving an honorary degree at Oxford Brookes University. Behind the scenes, there was a 3,000-strong petition against the degree, and George Roberts, the university's director of e-learning, said that that it had the support of senior professors and administration staff alike: "Clarkson's public statements could be interpreted to be at odds with many of the university's values."

That argument was expressed forcefully on the day by Rebecca Lush, who threw the pie. "Afterwards I had an extraordinary response with messages of support, including from several people in the media," she recalls. I met someone who works at News International [home of The Sun and The Sunday Times, Clarkson's print outlets] who just wouldn't let go of my hand, and kept on going, 'Thank you for doing that! Thank you!'"

Many of Clarkson's detractors have private ideas about why he adopts his provocative positions. Environmental writer George Monbiot ripped into Clarkson on Jeremy Vine's Radio 2 show thus: "I suggest that instead of getting into an overpowered 4x4 and ripping up the countryside, he responds to one of those emails which offers to enhance the size of his manhood." Which goes to show: male arguments almost always come back to questions of anatomy.

As for Clarkson, in a questionnaire for his publisher's Penguin, he responded to the question "What are you proudest of?" with the answer, "Nothing yet." Which may mean that he isn't proud of what he does, or that he has hidden depths that may yet emerge.

Meanwhile, Jeremy Clarkson, you stand accused ...

WANTED: For crimes against the Planet

THE CHARGE: CAUSING RECKLESS DAMAGE TO THE ENVIRONMENT, HASTENING GLOBAL WARMING

Jeremy Charles Robert Clarkson, you are charged with flying in the face of received wisdom by not only arguing that "engineering is more important than environmentalism" but moreover that "environmentalism has given the world nothing". "I do have a disregard for the environment," he has said. "I think the world can look after itself and we should enjoy it as best we can."

For some people, merely presenting a motoring programme like Top Gear would be evidence enough against him. Throw in such excesses as last year's 4x4 adventure on a Scottish hillside and you've got trouble keeping the courthouse mob at bay.

Clarkson boasted how he had been the first to drive a car to the summit of Ben Tongue, in a test that involved driving a Land Rover Discovery over heather and bogland which conservationists said could take years to recover.

Dave Morris, the director of the Scottish Ramblers Association, said: "We found Clarkson's stunt highly irresponsible. Driving to the top of a mountain over open ground is inevitably going to cause damage to the countryside. And when viewers see a man like Clarkson doing this it encourages them to try to do similar things. It is wrong for the BBC to promote such hare- brained and reckless behaviour."

Clarkson does concede that the world is warming up. "But let's just stop and think for a moment what the consequences might be. Switzerland loses its skiing resorts? The beach in Miami is washed away? North Carolina gets knocked over by a hurricane? Anything bothering you yet?"

THE WITNESSES: 'A SELFISH AND IRRESPONSIBLE ATTITUDE DRESSED UP AS LADDISH HUMOUR'

Rebecca Lush, an activist with the organisation Roadblock, says: "Clarkson used to be a climate change denier. Now that position is not tenable, so he just says, 'Who cares?' It's obnoxious: a selfish and irresponsible attitude and it's dressed up as laddish humour." Take the stand, Ben Stewart of Greenpeace: "Clarkson is a class A muppet and absolute plonker. One can only assume that his jeans are restricting his blood-flow. He says things about global warming that are wrong. Also he's said that he has wet dreams about Greenpeace ships turning over. He's best ignored, but that's pretty bad."

Parliamentary doubts about the Clarkson effect are not confined to Norman Baker and Tom Brake and what they regard as Clarkson's "curious and misguided attitude to the real and major threat posed by climate change." Labour MP Andrew Miller said Clarkson should be prosecuted after he drove from London to Brighton in a Porsche delivering an evil payload of illegal fumes. He was "turning our motorways into playgrounds".

THE VERDICT: GUILTY AS HELL

The only answer is for Clarkson to be sent to an eco-wilderness re-education camp far away from his Chipping Norton home to live as one with nature, Iron John-style for several years, and only readmitted into normal society when fuel cell cars with automatic speed cut-offs are the norm.

WANTED: For crimes against Common Decency

THE CHARGE: ROAD-HOGGERY, THREATENING BEHAVIOUR, AND ALL-ROUND OFFENSIVENESS

Clarkson is hereby accused of knowingly, and in the interests of controversial amusement, putting people's lives at risk. The cycling lobby took particular umbrage after the bombs of 7 July, when Clarkson wrote some "handy hints to those setting out on a bike for the first time", including "Do not cruise through red lights. Because if I'm coming the other way, I will run you down, for fun", and "Do not pull up at junctions in front of a line of traffic. Because if I'm behind you, I will set off at normal speed and you will be crushed under my wheels."

He has also attracted brickbats from the accident prevention charities and the Health and Safety executive, for saying things like: "On Top Gear, we refer to the Health and Safety people as the PPD. The programme prevention department."

Complaints to the BBC about the programme elicit the response that the audience knows that Top Gear is "pure entertainment". The car manufacturer Hyundai might not see it quite like that. In 1998, the company complained to the BBC for Clarkson's "bigoted and racist" comments after he had said that the designer of the Hyundai XG had probably had a spaniel for lunch. Hyundai is Korean.

But for many people - many journalists - the supreme Clarkson boorish moment came at the 2004 British Press Awards dinner when a fracas broke out involving him and the then editor of The Mirror, Piers Morgan. And the two of them seemed so happy in each other's company on a trip on Concorde (pictured above) ...

THE WITNESSES: 'I AM SORRY HE THINKS HEALTH AND SAFETY IS A CANCER IN CIVILISED SOCIETY'

Piers Morgan had this to say in a preview of the 2005 British Press Awards: "If you see Jeremy Clarkson, and he is sweating, has wonky eyes, and keeps abusing everyone who goes up on stage then be very careful. I made the fatal error last year of seeing him in this state and then jokily inviting him to punch me on the head, which is precisely what he then did a few hours later. Three times, quite hard, right smack on the bonce. I still have a neat two-inch scar from his ring down the right side of my forehead. Never could stand jewellery on a man."

The more serious charges come from the likes of Timothy Walker, director-general of the Health and Safety Executive. "I am sorry Jeremy Clarkson believed that health and safety was the 'cancer of a civilised society'. I do not think the families of over 200 people killed at work each year would share his view." Roger Geffen, campaigns manager of the CTC, the national cyclists' organisation, remains incensed at Clarkson's disregard for cyclists' safety. "We were unhappy that he effectively advocated running down cyclists".

THE VERDICT: GUILTY - BUT NOT SO GUILTY

Clarkson likes cars, and 'Top Gear' celebrates them. But there are signs that the defendant may be reforming. He has said that he agrees with the 20 mph limit in certain places, such as outside schools. So, a custodial sentence, yet not without the chance of remission.

WANTED: For crimes against Fashion

THE CHARGE: FLAGRANT PUBLIC APPEARANCES IN THE - UGH! - BLUE-DENIM GARB OF EVERYBLOKE

That Clarkson endangers the aesthetic environment by appearing on television flagrantly dressed in the garb of "everybloke" is hard to deny. Ill-fitting jeans, early Leo Sayer haircut, jacket and boots: the evidence is irrefutable, for those who are brave enough to confront it with their own eyes.

Clarkson was sporting enough to feature on a What Not to Wear Celebrity Special with Trinny and Susannah (and certainly needed to). But he remains notable for his contribution to the decline of the jeans industry, not least because of the colour of the denim he chooses.

Thanks in part to the Clarkson look, he has come to epitomise a certain vulgar tendency in public life, a screw-you attitude that is unattractive enough in male teenagers but which has crept upwards to encompass men of more advancing years - the yobs of middle youth, if you will.

Clarkson's lack of style could be a default position, albeit one that has become a mark of Millwall-type pride - nobody likes his look, and he doesn't care. "I suspect he plays on his 'I don't care about clothes' persona," says William Drew, editor of the men's fashion magazine Arena. "It fits in with his avowed disinterest in fashion or style." Then again, Clarkson has written about his fear of going bald, indicating a glimmer of male vanity. "All men actually do care about what they look like, and I guess Clarkson could open himself up to new ideas," adds Drew. "He's obviously talented and confident, so perhaps he could carry off a more confident look. He cares about new car engines: perhaps he could open up to style and culture."

THE WITNESSES: 'YES HE'S IMPROVED, BUT THEN HE STARTED AT A PRETTY LOW BASE'

Fashion trade magazine Draper's Record was the first publication to note the "Clarkson effect", particularly with reference to jeans. "About eight or so years ago denim was in a big slump," explains features editor Lorna Martin. "Jeremy Clarkson personified the problem and became legendary. We all saw Trinny and Susannah do his makeover on What Not To Wear and he looks better now, but that's starting at a low base.

GQ magazine has regularly voted Clarkson worst-dressed man of the year, and when its editor Dylan Jones bumped into Clarkson recently he couldn't help noticing that he was wearing pixie boots. "As I was beginning to castigate him for his inappropriate footwear," Jones wrote of the encounter in The Independent, he made his verbal pounce. 'OK Mr GQ, look at your tie, you look like Eric Morecambe' I've always been a big fan of JC - still am, actually - but I've learnt my lesson. You can criticise a man's dress sense, his driving, even occasionally his wife. But never his pixie boots."

THE VERDICT: GUILTY

Sentence commuted to 100 hours community service - as an intern in a Lucie Clayton finishing school, perhaps. Clarkson has a kind of anti-image, is negligent of his personal appearance, and offers a vaguely loutish persona. But the flashes of courtesy and care are to be encouraged.