Enthusiastic presenters

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

As I said earlier, the BBC have created a rod for their own back by putting all the focus on the presenter and requiring him/her to be a 'personality'.

Exactly. The presenter has almost become more important than the music. The BBC schedules for every single Prom concert begins: "Presented by *** ". Surely the correct place for this is at the end (or not at all). Indeed, on future Prom concert threads, perhaps I should do this rather than blindly quoting the BBC online schedule?

[cavatina]

It really is a desperately weak argument to say that listeners who criticise presenters are [...] envious

I'm not talking about ordinary, reasonable criticism: I'm referring to the kind of pettiness and mean-spiritedness that motivates people to cackle over mistakes, dwell on them, blow them all out of proportion and see them as more significant than they really are, and unleash a torrential flood of personal abuse on the poor sod who slipped up a little.

Not everyone here is guilty of that--and it's far better here than it was on the BBC boards-- but it wouldn't hurt any of us to examine our own motivations before we badmouth others. Nine times out of ten, being deliberately cruel to others over their perceived shortcomings is the sign of a frustrated, unhappy person.

[amateur51]

but it wouldn't hurt any of us to examine our own motivations before we badmouth others. Nine times out of ten, being deliberately cruel to others over their perceived shortcomings is the sign of a frustrated, unhappy person.

True, cavatina - frustrated by incompetence becoming the norm and unhappy that the incompetent people don't get shuffled off somewhere but instead continue to harass us & are well-paid for it too.

Is that so hard to understand?

[doversoul1]

Perhaps that's part of the problem: you think a public service radio station should be run to your standards and taste because you see yourself as more representative than you really are.

Oh, and you are a different caste whether you see it or not. No wonder you don't understand why people in the media make fun of you (and write you off) for having been a lecturer in Medieval French. "Har har, look at the fussy egghead."

I suggest that this thread be moved to the Diversions thread.

[french frank]

No wonder you don't understand why people in the media make fun of you (and write you off) for having been a lecturer in Medieval French. "Har har, look at the fussy egghead."

One anonymous BBC source (described, if I remember, as an 'enraged BBC insider"!) once in one Guardian article. Why enraged? I expressed concern that Radio 3's new Statement of Programme Policy had - for the first time - dropped any specific commitment to classical music. And worth doing, in spite of the abuse, because the following year the commitment was reinstated and was then written into the service licence.

People like that don't understand your point of view and never will because they're constitutionally incapable of it. When you speak of the "value of culture", you might as well be speaking a foreign language to them; it's a complete failure of communication and understanding.

'People like that' (I imagined it was probably the unnamed R3 press officer) may or may not understand - or at least those who had more clout in the BBC hierarchy obviously did.

Maybe I feel this kind of scorn more keenly because anti-intellectualism is far more widespread (and brutal) in the United States than it is over here. As a child, you either learn how to "pass for regular" or get beaten for being different.

I don't take any of this personally - it's nothing to do with 'me' - or 'you'.

Er...sorry?

You're being disingenuous: you invented your own words as if that was what people were saying and then described them as 'problematic, at least'. No one said them - except you.

No easy answers for any of this, unfortunately.

Well, at least that's one point you take. Now, can we get the discussion back to the issues instead of personalising it?

[Pianorak]

. . . Speaking for myself, I have experienced much better presentation - less obtrusive, more informative, more accurate - by presenters who were very good at presenting as well as being very knowledgeable. . .

The kind of presentation provided still by the low-profile TtN team. As Prof. Higgins might say: Why can't a presenter be more like a member of the TtN team!?!?

[Ventilhorn]

Cavatina: Some replies by French Frank to your recent posts:

One anonymous BBC source (described, if I remember, as an 'enraged BBC insider"!)
once in one Guardian article.
Why enraged? I expressed concern that Radio 3's new Statement of Programme Policy had - for the first time - dropped any specific commitment to classical music. And worth doing, in spite of the abuse, because the following year the commitment was reinstated and was then written into the service licence.
'People like that' (I imagined it was probably the unnamed R3 press officer) may or may not understand - or at least those who had more clout in the BBC hierarchy obviously did.
I don't take any of this personally - it's nothing to do with 'me' - or 'you'.
You're being disingenuous: you invented your own words as if that it what people were saying and then described them as 'problematic, at least'. No one said them - except you.
Well, at least that's one point you take.

Now, can we get the discussion back to the issues instead of personalising it?

Cavatina:It's time you went in search of another soap box, I fancy.

I congratulate French Frank upon her patience and forbearance. I don't believe that many of us would show such charity

So it's goodbye from me and goodbye from ???????

VH

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I reiterate that point that the presenter has been elevated to a point beyond his/her relevance. Breakfast presenters are now DJs-with-a-brain whose presence is given as much prominence as the music itself. This seems to come from Radios 1 & 2, where the DJs were given so much power that they could become so unpleasant as to refuse to play Cliff Richards' music out of sheer pettyness. Thankfully Radio 3 presenters are nothing like this, but their increased prominence is a worry nevertheless.

[Word]

If the presenter were to appear first in the name of the programme I would agree but I don't think the current approach could be described as personality-led. (Perhaps that's one to keep an eye on for the future.) I also don't find the presenters unduly intrusive, though that may be because I don't happen to listen to the programmes where listeners are continually implored to send text messages.

p.s. Surely "Rob's Rucksack" has been considered as a programme idea at some point

[Roslynmuse]

There was a time when we would have had something like " That was Beethoven's 6th Symphony, the Pastoral, played by the BBC SO conducted by Norman del Mar, before an audience in the BBC Studios at Maida Vale. Goodnight."

And to be honest that's what I would prefer now too.

[David Underdown]

Genuine enthusiasm for a subject can be great. BBC4 has come up with some great presenters for slightly quirky subjects recently, the likes of Richard Taylor, by profession a Technology/IP lawyer, but with an encyclopaedic knowledge of churches, and a gifted communicator of that knowledge

[Roslynmuse]

Anyone who doesn't think that R3 programmes aren't presenter-led should take a glance at p 130 of next week's Radio Times. Film music night at the Proms, and it's illustrated with a pic of Katie Derham. Maybe the visuals for Star Wars, Schindler's List, Psycho et al just haven't got the same pulling power...

A letter on p 140 from a 16-year-old re R1 DJs. 'I don't think it's fair to get rid of people [ie the DJs] just because they're older than the target age for listeners, which is 15 - 29. ...[Jo Whiley] had a great show, even if she was in her 40s. [!!! ] We teenagers don't care if Radio 1 isn't "youthful". It doesn't matter how old DJs are, what we care about is the music."

Perhaps that reader is in the vocal minority and therefore his view is irrelevant...

[pilamenon]

Seems from the discussion so far that there are three kinds of problems - though I'll wait for the Spanish Inquisition to add more.

1. Slips or minor errors, such as the one mentioned ab initio. They can even be funny and entertaining, and in the TV world resulted in more programming. I think such errors sometimes went under the name Colemanballs.

2. Opinions - possibly not genuine. I don't mind an announcer/presenter telling us a performance was "wonderful" if it indeed was, or he/she felt it to be. Often everything these days is hyped up, and saying a performance is going to be wonderful in advance might be tempting fate. Removing all opinions might be a step too far though, and I guess back announcements of the form "that was a really awful performance of Beethoven's 6th, the worst since X's RFH 1997 performance ..." would be totally out of order. There was a time when we would have had something like " That was Beethoven's 6th Symphony, the Pastoral, played by the BBC SO conducted by Norman del Mar, before an audience in the BBC Studios at Maida Vale. Goodnight."

3. Factual errors. These may creep in from time to time, but apparently some people think the number of these has been increasing recently. Many are really not too serious, and often corrected later.

Thanks for such a balanced summary of the issues, Dave. My concern about overenthusiastic presenters is not motivated by frustration that it is they who are doing the job, not I! Any "unhappiness" (pace cavatina) is a sense of enjoyment being compromised by intrusiveness. Of course we can't (and shouldn't) go back to the 1950s and announcers in dinner jackets wishing us goodnight but there is a middle way which combines knowledge, accuracy, and not a little humour. For me, Donald McLeod epitomises the approach which R3 producers should adopt as general policy for their presenters, and the excellent ratings for Composer of the Week are no doubt influenced at least a little by his impressive custodianship of the programme. He also knows how to convey the atmosphere and enjoyment of a live concert without the banal platitudes and forced (and yes, it is contrived) enthusiasm of some (but by no means all) of those who do the job. In my view, a top-quality presenter informs and reflects a little of the mood of a concert. I think it is a fine balance, and not an easy thing to do well. It is easier to adopt a one-size-fits-all approach to presentation, and that is unfortunately in my view what has happened to Radio 3. Contrived and over-the-top enthusiasm is what I expect from CBeebies and CBBC, and much of what I hear on Radio 3 nowadays makes me feel deeply patronised/talked-down to. Even the much admired presenters of the Early Music Show fall into this category for me.

Dave, totally agree about slips/minor errors. They can be amusing, and Radio 3 presenters were always good at acknowledging them but making light of them and enhancing our enjoyment in the process.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

If the presenter were to appear first in the name of the programme I would agree but I don't think the current approach could be described as personality-led.

This is my point - Look at the BBC Radio 3 Proms schedules for this week:

Monday (Prom 23)

BBC PROMS 2011

Live from the Royal Albert Hall, London

Presented by Martin Handley

Energy and Romantic drive characterise the music of tonight's Prom with ...

Tuesday (Prom 24)

BBC PROMS 2011

Live from the Royal Albert Hall, London

Presented by Louise Fryer

Tasmin Little performs Elgar's great Violin Concerto with Sir Andrew Davis and ...

Wednesday (Prom 26)

BBC PROMS 2011

Live from the Royal Albert Hall, London

Presented by Andrew McGregor

The BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra with chief conductor Donald Runnicles throws the musical focus on...

Thursday (Prom 27):

BBC PROMS 2011

Live from the Royal Albert Hall, London

Presented by Martin Handley

The BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra opens this Prom with a major world premiere by....

Friday (Prom 29)

BBC PROMS 2011

Live from the Royal Albert Hall, London

Presented by Donald Macleod

In one of the most eagerly anticipated Proms of the season the Simon Bolivar Symphony Orchestra returns to ...

They're all like this: presenter first, music second.

[french frank]

If the presenter were to appear first in the name of the programme I would agree but I don't think the current approach could be described as personality-led.

In support of EA's evidence, look at the iPlayer homepage (at ..crikey, 11.58am is that all? I've just had my lunch on the assumption that it was later - no mind!): Rob Cowan, Sarah Walker and Jez Nelson get the pix - and in all honesty, what is there to distinguish at least the first two programmes other than the presenter? Even Lebrecht merits a picture for his interview with some old French opera director or other ...

More youthful people brought up on pop music stations expect DJs to be the centre of any music programme. Ergo, that's what R3 has to do. This is, like, 2011. (I've just deleted what I was going to add: 'and stupid' )