More Meades

[Thropplenoggin]

Such an intelligent critic and television programme maker and presenter:

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/nov/10/jonathan-meades-architecture-television-fiction

Choice quote:

'Does the BBC treasure him? Does it understand the talent it has in its possession? "I don't really think so, no. They don't always say yes. If I say I want to do four hours about brutalism, they'll give me two. The last film we had to do in just 19 days. You can't do any fancy set-ups: no cranes, no dollies. It's not slavery, obviously, but it's much more difficult than it used to be. My subjects are regarded as minoritarian and that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. On BBC2, I used to get 2.5 million to 3 million viewers; now I get a tenth of that on BBC4."'

[MrGongGong]

Thanks for this

I rarely watch TV these days so good to get a 'steer'

[Thropplenoggin]

Thanks for this

Unfortunately, the interviewer is predictably banal. Meades is 'impossibly erudite'. No, he's simply well-educated and well-read. Then she insists on inserting herself into the article: on being presented with an exotic local delicacy, caillettes: 'Is this a test? If so, I'm going to pass it with flying colours. We eat them with rocket, and as we do, we talk...'

I rarely watch TV these days so good to get a 'steer'

Me neither. I'm down to Whatever Happened To The Likely Lads? on Monday evenings and, er, that's it.

[muzzer]

Overall she seemed rather in awe of him wouldn't you say?

[Thropplenoggin]

Overall she seemed rather in awe of him wouldn't you say?

Quite. A total waste. I'm surprised Meades didn't eat her for breakfast and spit out the gristle, what with his Huge Man Brain and everything.

[teamsaint]

thanks @Noggo.
I'm also a very occasional telly watcher these days (music and football and there isn't much of either on terrestrial), but Meades is always worth a looking out for.

The cult of "ME" is thriving then.....

[teamsaint]

Quite. A total waste. I'm surprised Meades didn't eat her for breakfast and spit out the gristle, what with his Huge Man Brain and everything.

are you sure that this is a thing? I'm sure I read otherwise on this board..........

[Wallace]

Thanks for linking to this Thropplenoggin. Like others I hardly watch TV because almost everything is devoid of thoughtful content and is presented in a way which is an insult to the viewer's intelligence. Meades is different. He acknowledges the problem in a quote from the article:
"Well, anecdotal evidence suggests that those people who do watch truly revere him. "I'm aware of that and I'm grateful people like the films so much. But, it's force majeure: there is nothing else on. Twenty years ago, there was lots of stuff that was individualistic and entertaining. But not now. The people they get to front these documentaries can't write! They're cobbled together by a producer and a researcher and the "expert" reads the lines, which have often been plagiarised." "

"I'm surprised Meades didn't eat her for breakfast and spit out the gristle, what with his Huge Man Brain and everything. "

He is, I sense, a gentleman, and a gentleman wouldn't do such a thing - that is if gentlemen still exist - or did most of them disappear at the same time as most TV stopped being watchable?

[kernelbogey]

Such an intelligent critic and television programme maker and presenter:

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/nov/10/jonathan-meades-architecture-television-fiction

[...]

The article contains a link to the YouTube of Meades's recently aired film about Essex, and the contributions to the county by philanthropists. Worth watching.

[french frank]

That quote comes very à propos

"My subjects are regarded as minoritarian and that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. On BBC2, I used to get 2.5 million to 3 million viewers; now I get a tenth of that on BBC4."

The BBC's failure to cover the arts in a nushell.

Beneficent.

[kernelbogey]

Unfortunately, the interviewer is predictably banal. Meades is 'impossibly erudite'. No, he's simply well-educated and well-read. Then she insists on inserting herself into the article[...]

There is no reason why the interviewer should not 'insert' herself into the article. She is writing about a dialogue she had. I found it a rather charming account: the antithesis of banal.

[amateur51]

That quote comes very à propos

"My subjects are regarded as minoritarian and that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. On BBC2, I used to get 2.5 million to 3 million viewers; now I get a tenth of that on BBC4."

The BBC's failure to cover the arts in a nushell.

Beneficent.

A fine quotation, worth keeping dry for inclusion in FoR3's submission to Tony Hall's consultation, I reckon.

[Stephen Whitaker]

There is no reason why the interviewer should not 'insert' herself into the article. She is writing about a dialogue she had. I found it a rather charming account: the antithesis of banal.

I quite agree, her work is in the tradition of literary interviewers like George Plimpton. Not only that she has just produced a well reviewed book

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Her-Brilliant-Career-Extraordinary-Fifties/dp/1844087409/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1384091048&sr=1-1

[french frank]

I would agree that it's a style of journalism (not uncommon) aimed at being interesting in itself. But I find it a bit self indulgent and irritating. The rationale for writing in that way is that I am almost certainly in a minority.

[mercia]

so the 3 million people who managed to find BBC2 with their remote controls cannot also find BBC4 - extraordinary