If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Exactly. The question asked was about the justification, rather than R3's preference or anything else.
Perhaps the 'justification' is that it helps to create young Jackson's warmer, more inviting Radio 3 - a project which is just part of the BBC's seemingly endless, and so far largely unsuccessful, masterplan to demonstrate it's 'relevance' in a changing world and get its Royal Charter renewed .
Fair enought, but the point remains: what is the justification for putting it on Radio3 and not leaving it on Radio 2?
I certainly think Montague Phillips, William Alwyn and Eric Coates (for example, who featured in last night’s concert alongside Debussy, Grieg etc - live, ygad, from Maida Vale) have a rightful place on R3 - much more naturally than on R2 imo
"...the isle is full of noises,
Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices..."
Nor mine. And there doesn't need to be a discussion about relative quality, good or bad; or whether I (whoever I is) like, enjoy, admire or appreciate it. It isn't about those things. But there can usefully be a reasoned discussion about what criteria should be applied. For example, one can complain (and one has!) about how often Florence Price gets played. But according to what criterion would one say that her music should never be played on R3?
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Nor mine. And there doesn't need to be a discussion about relative quality, good or bad; or whether I (whoever I is) like, enjoy, admire or appreciate it. It isn't about those things. But there can usefully be a reasoned discussion about what criteria should be applied. For example, one can complain (and one has!) about how often Florence Price gets played. But according to what criterion would one say that her music should never be played on R3?
The frequency with which works of some belatedly recognized female composers, including Florence Price, Albena Petrovic and Louise Farrenc, are played nowadays makes me wonder whether somebody's got a guilty conscience.
The frequency with which works of some belatedly recognized female composers, including Florence Price, Albena Petrovic and Louise Farrenc, are played nowadays makes me wonder whether somebody's got a guilty conscience.
Arguably they should have a guilty conscience but that's a different discussion. Is there an argument that Florence Price has a place on R3 and Eric Coates doesn't?
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Arguably they should have a guilty conscience but that's a different discussion. Is there an argument that Florence Price has a place on R3 and Eric Coates doesn't?
Let's be generous and say there's room for both (in moderation!
Let's be generous and say there's room for both (in moderation!
Why? I'm trying to tease out reasoned arguments, definitions, criteria. And am I alone in thinking Friday Night Is Music Night is a stupid name for a Radio 3 programme?
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Why? I'm trying to tease out reasoned arguments, definitions, criteria. And am I alone in thinking Friday Night Is Music Night is a stupid name for a Radio 3 programme?
Well, it's less stupid than 'Tearjerker', although thankfully that seems to have vanished (at least for now), and 'Afternoon Concert' was a pretty stupid title for a programme that, while it was on in the afternoon, wasn't really a concert.
"...the isle is full of noises,
Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices..."
'Afternoon Concert' was a pretty stupid title for a programme that, while it was on in the afternoon, wasn't really a concert.
The definition of 'concert' is pretty vague. Not much more than a group of musicians playing together. So what does 'Live in Concert' mean? But all this gets away (again) from reasons for and against FNIMN and Eric Coates et similes being on Radio 3. Cui bono?
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
In one respect none, but in another quite a lot - it is short pieces with presenter input, which is the current preferred format for R3.
Whether that is sufficient is a whole other, and much bigger, argument about what R3 is actually for.
Radio 2 has in general always been short pieces with presenter input,
Radio 2 has in general always been short pieces with presenter input,
Exactly. Which is now it's R3's preferred format: it will appeal to R2 listeners, as will Jools Holland and Friday Night Is Music Night. Radio 2 can afford to shed half a million listeners - just the job for R3. None of this shows any concern for what Radio 3 listeners might prefer on Radio 3.
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Exactly. Which is now it's R3's preferred format: it will appeal to R2 listeners, as will Jools Holland and Friday Night Is Music Night. Radio 2 can afford to shed half a million listeners - just the job for R3. None of this shows any concern for what Radio 3 listeners might prefer on Radio 3.
Will/do R2 listeners cross the great divide to access R3?
Exactly. Which is now it's R3's preferred format: it will appeal to R2 listeners, as will Jools Holland and Friday Night Is Music Night. Radio 2 can afford to shed half a million listeners - just the job for R3. None of this shows any concern for what Radio 3 listeners might prefer on Radio 3.
Rather than worrying about what current Radio 3 listeners might prefer, perhaps young Jackson is more concerned with trying to work out what might be to the taste of possible future Radio 3 listeners.
Comment