The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[Richard Tarleton]

There again, I am happy to listen to performances of the works of the likes of the murderer Don Carlo Gesualdo

Pedantic footnote - Gesualdo merely fulfilling the social norms of the day - it was positively expected of him to kill his wife in the circumstances. This from Glenn Watkins' book, as discussed with Catherine on the Early Music Show :

...Spanish convention, which would have included Naples, inclined to the killing of both the adulteress and her lover, the northern Italian tradition to killing only the wife [ ] The custom held that a cuckolded male, and particularly a Neapolitan prince, had not only the right but the duty to protect the honour of the family name by murdering the guilty parties.

[clive heath]

To my mind nothing illustrates the paucity of imagination of the Breakfast presenters than the overuse of Faure's "Cantique de Jean Racine" which they are determined to turn from an item that you once welcomed ( I first sang in it about 15 years ago) into one which you resent.

[Suffolkcoastal]

It is something that R3 has become very good at doing Clive, with its increasingly narrow music selections at certain times of day. The Dag Wiren played this morning is just about the only piece of Wiren played on R3 under the present regime, either just the March or occasionally the whole work. The Violin Sonatina get an a couple of airings a year in the same performance on TTN, but that's it. Far from broadening the listening experience of and educating its audience R3 nowadays does nothing but seeming try to convince listeners that certain composers only wrote one (or two) works and nothing else is worth bothering about.

PS the Slavonic and Hungarian Dance obsessions just continues we've already had 20 of the former (RC is yet again guilty of a number of these) this year in total and nearly as many of the latter. The Four Seasons is already in double figures as are chunks from Peer Gynt and The Nutcracker. I must try and do a Classic FM comparison next year I'm sure certain CFM favourites are now appearing more often on R3 than they are on CFM.

[Honoured Guest]

Top tunes all!

[french frank]

I must try and do a Classic FM comparison next year I'm sure certain CFM favourites are now appearing more often on R3 than they are on CFM.

I think R3's aim is to gradually inch over to the CFM repertoire and try to force CFM to move to something more esoteric. And, lo! One morning Radio 3 has CFM's 5.6m listeners and CFM has the few stragglers who stuck with it. Public service broadcasting wins again.

[Honoured Guest]

You know the BBC's objectives. They differ from what you would wish them to be. End of.

[french frank]

You know the BBC's objectives. They differ from what you would wish them to be. End of.

I wish I did know what the "BBC's" objectives are. In fact, God knows even what Radio 3's objectives are - it isn't obvious from the results.

[Serial_Apologist]

Top tunes all!

Depends on which sense of top.

[Frances_iom]

Depends on which sense of top.

HG being a BBC shill (?employee) just means top of the playlist - little point in humouring him/her

[antongould]

HG being a BBC shill (?employee) just means top of the playlist - little point in humouring him/her

Oh excellent I was accused of being a shill a few years ago and was trying to remember the word - I wouln't dare mention my employer.....l.

[clive heath]

End of ??? What decade are we in here?

[aeolium]

End of ??? What decade are we in here?

Perhaps "End of" as in "End of history", so the 1980s?

But this is the "eternal" breakfast debate....

[Honoured Guest]

I wish I did know what the "BBC's" objectives are. In fact, God knows even what Radio 3's objectives are - it isn't obvious from the results.

You know what the BBC Trust states to be the BBC's objectives. They differ from what you would wish them to be. End of.

[teamsaint]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/annualreport/2013/overview/role_and_purposes.html

the way I read it, the public purposes are what the BBC theoretically seeks to deliver.

The strategic objectives are really the way in which those purposes are supposed to be delivered.

The first" purpose" manages to be both glib and vaguely Orwellian.
The second , third and fourth seem to be areas of monumental failure, given their budget.
The fifth purpose fails so spectacularly as to be tragicomic.
The sixth they do a bit, not always very well, and so do plenty of other media and communications outlets, often for "free". But they do it better than ITV, to be fair. Which isn't difficult.

If one of the purposes was "to have 24 hour news services endlessly repeating government and establishment views on how our country needs to change for the benefit of those who already have power and wealth," they would have a big success on their hands.

[Flosshilde]

You know what the BBC Trust states to be the BBC's objectives. They differ from what you would wish them to be. End of.

Having browsed through some of HG's posts (it's a dirty job, but someone's got to do it), it would seem to me that 'honoured' is stretching a point.