Drama to be eradicated from Radio 3

[AuntDaisy]

Perhaps SJ's job title should be changed to Head of Less is More. He could then attend meetings in W1A chaired by Hugh Bonneviile.

[LMcD]

A fair summary.

How about trimming upper management costs?

Perhaps SJ's job title should be changed to Head of Less is More. He could then attend meetings in W1A chaired by Hugh Bonneviile.

[AuntDaisy]

Sam J. explained the most expensive R3outputs are Live Music, including the Proms, and Drama. With the successive cuts, the choice was cut back live music, including the Proms, or Drama. And the choice was cuts to drama because the offering of music was more in service of the remit of R3 as a music station. (This may be welcome in view of the concern R3 will become a ragbag of that which other stations don't require........) He also opined that the lengthening of Private Passions was an increase in speech radio on R3 (without saying it was a cheap way of filling another 30 minutes.....

The interviewer was in some degree more combative and Sam J not quite as dismissive as station controllers, other BBC head honchos (cf Victoria Wood's Head of Chairs sketch) often come over. But, as ever, the decision has been made, an explanation has been given and in a sense he has an unanswerable case if the money is running out and a choice had to be made.

A fair summary.

How about trimming upper management costs?

[Cockney Sparrow]

Sam J. explained the most expensive R3outputs are Live Music, including the Proms, and Drama. With the successive cuts, the choice was cut back live music, including the Proms, or Drama. And the choice was cuts to drama because the offering of music was more in service of the remit of R3 as a music station. (This may be welcome in view of the concern R3 will become a ragbag of that which other stations don't require........) He also opined that the lengthening of Private Passions was an increase in speech radio on R3 (without saying it was a cheap way of filling another 30 minutes.....

The interviewer was in some degree more combative and Sam J not quite as dismissive as station controllers, other BBC head honchos (cf Victoria Wood's Head of Chairs sketch) often come over. But, as ever, the decision has been made, an explanation has been given and in a sense he has an unanswerable case if the money is running out and a choice had to be made.

Signed

[AuntDaisy]

Sam Jackson will be avoiding answering questions on R4’s Feedback this afternoon:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0028bp9

Why does "Gatsby in Harlem" have to be the example of R3 drama? And, quelle surprise, a certain Dr Who actor gets a mention.
Why stick at a 90min slot? I enjoyed listening to the 2 hour "White Devil" this morning.

Odious little toad Cost. Drama. Audience up! Waffle. Proms. Waffle. Drama. Not Classic FM. Waffle. Modernism. Waffle.

He has no idea of what R3 used to be like.

[french frank]

Sam Jackson will be avoiding answering questions on R4’s Feedback this afternoon:

Must hear this before writing letter. Will he say (again) "Most people listen to Radio 3 for the music" - hence speech/drama gets dropped? Well, if there's a lot more music than speech/drama It's likely that people listen more to the music. As they do on CFM where there is only music ... I read that Channel 5 is reintroducing a weekly drama slot (gap in the market?) though it doesn't seem as if much is likely to be classic theatre - more of the contemporary 'plays for today' variety.

[Belgrove]

Sam Jackson will be avoiding answering questions on R4’s Feedback this afternoon:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0028bp9

[vinteuil]

Just remembered: I was thinking of 'bare nouns' with no determiner. So, if I ask: Moore, are there apples in your basket, he must answer Yes. But if I add 'any' or 'some', Moore can give them a nuance that allows him to say, No - just to annoy me.

... ah yes : bare nouns.

It's on the 'logic' end of grammar concerns.

I last looked at a linguistics text book in 1972. I last looked at a logic text book in 1974.

Eheu fugatches, chaps and chapesses

.

[AuntDaisy]

Just remembered: I was thinking of 'bare nouns' with no determiner. So, if I ask: Moore, are there apples in your basket, he must answer Yes. But if I add 'any' or 'some', Moore can give them a nuance that allows him to say, No just to annoy me.

I live and learn, thanks French Frank.

That reminds me of one of dear old Donald Trefusis' Loose Ends talks...

[french frank]

Possibly "zero article"? (OED link)

Just remembered: I was thinking of 'bare nouns' with no determiner. So, if I ask: Moore, are there apples in your basket, he must answer Yes. But if I add 'any' or 'some', Moore can give them a nuance that allows him to say, No - just to annoy me.

[AuntDaisy]

Yes. I had a transcript bookmarked for ages, and read it quite often. I don't think I've heard it since the LP came out.

But what is the grammatical term for something which leaves the actual meaning in doubt in this particular way?

Possibly "zero article"? (OED link)

zero

The term zero is used to indicate the absence of a grammatical feature when that feature would normally be present or is present in similar constructions. For example, a zero that-clause is a that-clause in which that has been omitted, as in ‘He said he would be late’ (instead of ‘He said that he would be late’). Similarly, a clause with zero auxiliary is one in which the auxiliary verb has been omitted, as in ‘You coming?’ (instead of ‘Are you coming?’).

[french frank]

... as in the Russell / Moore discourse -

Yes. I had a transcript bookmarked for ages, and read it quite often. I don't think I've heard it since the LP came out.

But what is the grammatical term for something which leaves the actual meaning in doubt in this particular way?

[vinteuil]

I can't remember what the grammatical term is for the use or absence of the definite article, where the reference is to some or a substantial amount but not all within the relevant category...

... as in the Russell / Moore discourse -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSifxC_L9F0

.

[french frank]

Bit harsh that : I would say that series like The Wire and The Sopranos are as good as or better than a great deal of Jacobean Tragedy and many contemporary sitcoms are both funnier and wiser than a good deal of 18th and virtually all 19th century comedy.

I wasn't writing it all off! I can't remember what the grammatical term is for the use or absence of the definite article, where the reference is to some or a substantial amount but not all within the relevant category. So not all written-for-radio drama is bad (though it may or may not be ephemeral). Sitcom, I believe, is 'comedy' rather than 'drama'...