The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[Bryn]

James Weeks: Durham - some uncomplimentary remarks about this reported by Martin this morning. From the little I heard of it I can't disagree with 'paucity of wit and creativity'.

James has responded:

https://www.facebook.com/james.weeks.31105

[kernelbogey]

James has responded:

https://www.facebook.com/james.weeks.31105

Bryn, I would like to read what he said, but I don't do fb. Any chance of your cutting & pasting here?

[Bryn]

Bryn, I would like to read what he said, but I don't do fb. Any chance of your cutting & pasting here?

Without seeking permission:

Woohoo! Handbags at Breakfast on Radio 3 over my piano piece 'Durham'. One irate listener wrote in to denounce its 'paucity of wit and creativity, an insult to your listeners and to Durham.' I have to say this is a proud moment: massive thanks to Martin Handley for playing it on his show, and to Siwan Rhys for recording it so beautifully on my new album Summer, which you simply must now get in order to feel similarly infuriated. Please do write in.

[kernelbogey]

Thanks, Bryn.

Having since listened to the piece in its entirety, I found it hasn't grown on me.

I think the person who texted the Breakfast programme 'anonymously' should have identified him/herself; and perhaps I shouldn't have quoted that rather spiteful phrase.

However simplicity isn't always rewarding IMV. I remember my brother, many years ago, saying that Spohr's Octet (I think he was referring to the last movement) was 'empty headed'; I think I had a similar response this morning.

(I'l get my handbag.)

[french frank]

I think the person who texted the Breakfast programme 'anonymously' should have identified him/herself; and perhaps I shouldn't have quoted that rather spiteful phrase.

A definite downside to the internet is that it's apparently now generally thought an advantage for Mr Everyman to have his say on everything (all right so far) and have his wise words broadcast to the wide general public. More shameful to me (just my opinion, you understand ) is that i don't believe for one minute it's done to initiate genuine debate, but just to add some spice to the programme and an aspect of a station that's become 80% naff light entertainment. Far better to broadcast it in the context of discussion with professional critics who at least have the discrimination to comment critically

Artists of all sorts have to live with this now; I don't think anyone's better off for it.

NB I think this forum is all right, as comments here gain little prominence ; but brutal people will always say brutal things: I hope they're disliked for it

As they say on Twitter (I think), "All opinions my own."

[vinteuil]

; but brutal people will always say brutal things: I hope they're disliked for it

... yeah - but snarky is kinda fun, I find.

I enjoy snarky critics and writers

.

[french frank]

... yeah - but snarky is kinda fun, I find.

I enjoy snarky critics and writers

.

There's witty snarky and brutal snarky.

[antongould]

A definite downside to the internet is that it's apparently now generally thought an advantage for Mr Everyman to have his say on everything (all right so far) and have his wise words broadcast to the wide general public. More shameful to me (just my opinion, you understand ) is that i don't believe for one minute it's done to initiate genuine debate, but just to add some spice to the programme and an aspect of a station that's become 80% naff light entertainment. Far better to broadcast it in the context of discussion with professional critics who at least have the discrimination to comment critically

Artists of all sorts have to live with this now; I don't think anyone's better off for it.

NB I think this forum is all right, as comments here gain little prominence ; but brutal people will always say brutal things: I hope they're disliked for it

As they say on Twitter (I think), "All opinions my own."

80% ……… ?????? this bit of your own I don’t get …….

[french frank]

80% ……… ?????? this bit of your own I don’t get …….

The percentage is variable, depending on how much of the output matches the taste of the individual

[oddoneout]

Thanks, Bryn.

Having since listened to the piece in its entirety, I found it hasn't grown on me.

I think the person who texted the Breakfast programme 'anonymously' should have identified him/herself; and perhaps I shouldn't have quoted that rather spiteful phrase.

However simplicity isn't always rewarding IMV. I remember my brother, many years ago, saying that Spohr's Octet (I think he was referring to the last movement) was 'empty headed'; I think I had a similar response this morning.

(I'l get my handbag.)

If asked I would say my impression is that generally the listeners who contact the programme aren't afraid to be named even if they voice adverse criticism, and I find some amusement on occasion, when they give their (sometimes quite irate) opinion, at their conviction that all fellow listeners will agree.

[Ein Heldenleben]

A definite downside to the internet is that it's apparently now generally thought an advantage for Mr Everyman to have his say on everything (all right so far) and have his wise words broadcast to the wide general public. More shameful to me (just my opinion, you understand ) is that i don't believe for one minute it's done to initiate genuine debate, but just to add some spice to the programme and an aspect of a station that's become 80% naff light entertainment. Far better to broadcast it in the context of discussion with professional critics who at least have the discrimination to comment critically


Artists of all sorts have to live with this now; I don't think anyone's better off for it.

NB I think this forum is all right, as comments here gain little prominence ; but brutal people will always say brutal things: I hope they're disliked for it

As they say on Twitter (I think), "All opinions my own."

Is it hypocritical to anonymously criticise those who post anonymous criticism on the internet? And if I criticise them am I guilty of some mind of meta-hypocrisy ?

[french frank]

Is it hypocritical to anonymously criticise those who post anonymous criticism on the internet? And if I criticise them am I guilty of some mind of meta-hypocrisy ?

??? I can't say;: it's more a matter of the terms in which one offers one's remarks (anonymous or not). I didn't criticise (anonymously) the anonymous critic, but more lamented the fact that these platforms which reach large audiences can be used as loudspeakers to 'broadcast' casual thoughts under the guise of 'criticism'. Radio 3 chooses to air such comments, not - in my view to add to critical debate - but to spice up the programme. I'm not into 'shock jocks' either but people do find them entertaining.

I hope I haven't missed your point!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQnd5ilKx2Y

[Ein Heldenleben]

??? I can't say;: it's more a matter of the terms in which one offers one's remarks (anonymous or not). I didn't criticise (anonymously) the anonymous critic, but more lamented the fact that these platforms which reach large audiences can be used as loudspeakers to 'broadcast' casual thoughts under the guise of 'criticism'. Radio 3 chooses to air such comments, not - in my view to add to critical debate - but to spice up the programme. I'm not into 'shock jocks' either but people do find them entertaining.

I hope I haven't missed your point!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQnd5ilKx2Y

Not at all I was being facetious . A bald two sentence criticism of any work of art is bound to sound superficial . The problem is the broadcasters don’t have time to air a more lengthy considered piece. The real problem is not criticism but that everything is either “brilliant” or “fantastic” which in its own way as reductive as a short brutal put-down and of no use to the creative artist.

[LMcD]

Not at all I was being facetious . A bald two sentence criticism of any work of art is bound to sound superficial . The problem is the broadcasters don’t have time to air a more lengthy considered piece. The real problem is not criticism but that everything is either “brilliant” or “fantastic” which in its own way as reductive as a short brutal put-down and of no use to the creative artist.

Could 'modified rapture' not perhaps be permitted in any brief comment on a piece by Gilbert and Sullivan?

[Ein Heldenleben]

Could 'modified rapture' not perhaps be permitted in any brief comment on a piece by Gilbert and Sullivan?

You are asking the wrong person as they are a bit of a blind spot...Slightly irritating tedium comes a bit closer.
Sorry....