The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

CFM provides one example of how classical music has evolved into a source of short pieces taken from complete works, often used as birthday request tunes, mood enhancers and for 'relaxation'. It wasn't like that in the 1950's so something has evolved.

The "something" is that the audience for such "mood enhancers" is no longer being served by R2 where, on programmes like Family Favourites, Your 100 Best Tunes, These You Have Loved, and various programmes presented by David Jacobs, such listeners used to be catered for in the '50s & '60s. And the Beeb, instead of maintaining R3 as a unique, "minority interest" station for Musics from the Western Classical Traditions (and non-Western Classical traditions, and the heavier-duty Jazz developments) responded to the CFM "threat" by aping its presentation style (and filching some of its presenters) in a manic chase for higher numbers of listeners.

I think some music can belong on either R2 or R3. My point was that each station 's character is not significantly changed by occasionally playing music notionally associated with the other.

Carol Channing and Hello, Dolly "can belong on R3", gradus? How come? What is in that particular number that makes it suitable for even "occasional" inclusion on R3? And why not on R1? Or R6?

But those of us who think in this way have "lost" the argument - and, as a result, R3 has lost us as listeners. The current mentality behind the BBC means that there'll be the "occasional" playing of Flash, Bang, Wallop - or whatever - when whichsoever singer dies (and I hope that Mr Steele is with us for many, many more years) - and people genuinely baffled as to why some of us share the kernel's objections (preferring to listen to a Haydn String Quartet), and who think we should just shut up and leave them to their own pleasures.

[BBMmk2]

Bloody Pop Eye the Sailorman!

[LMcD]

The "something" is that the audience for such "mood enhancers" is no longer being served by R2 where, on programmes like Family Favourites, Your 100 Best Tunes, These You Have Loved, and various programmes presented by David Jacobs, such listeners used to be catered for in the '50s & '60s. And the Beeb, instead of maintaining R3 as a unique, "minority interest" station for Musics from the Western Classical Traditions (and non-Western Classical traditions, and the heavier-duty Jazz developments) responded to the CFM "threat" by aping its presentation style (and filching some of its presenters) in a manic chase for higher numbers of listeners.


Carol Channing and Hello, Dolly "can belong on R3", gradus? How come? What is in that particular number that makes it suitable for even "occasional" inclusion on R3? And why not on R1? Or R6?

But those of us who think in this way have "lost" the argument - and, as a result, R3 has lost us as listeners. The current mentality behind the BBC means that there'll be the "occasional" playing of Flash, Bang, Wallop - or whatever - when whichsoever singer dies (and I hope that Mr Steele is with us for many, many more years) - and people genuinely baffled as to why some of us share the kernel's objections (preferring to listen to a Haydn String Quartet), and who think we should just shut up and leave them to their own pleasures.

I like listening to Haydn String Quartets (I can take a Joke as well as the next man), but not at breakfast time.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I like listening to Haydn String Quartets (I can take a Joke as well as the next man), but not at breakfast time.

But are you saying that there should be not a single radio channel in the UK that does broadcast them at breakfast time?

Is there a radio station with a "remit" equivalent to R3's anywhere in Europe (or the States, or in Japan, or anywhere) that would broadcast "Hello, Dolly" as part of its schedules?

If the idea of BBC radio stations broadcasting material other than that with which it is usually identified, when does R1 ever broadcast Monteverdi (these days - not on the programme of an inspirational broadcaster who died fourteen years ago)? When does R2 ever include a Schumann Violin Sonata? When does R6 ever include a piece by Alkan? Which of those stations' presenters would ever think that such types of Music were appropriate for their programmes? Or which of their listeners? If it is not questioned on those stations what sort of repertoire is presented to which sort of audiences, then it is only fair and right that neither should it be on R3.

But, as I've said, this argument is lost, and R3 and all UK radio stations are out-of-bounds to those of us who do enjoy listening to a Haydn String Quartet first thing in the morning. R3 can broadcast "Hello, Dolly" and have it defended because Bernstein and Sondheim also wrote Musicals. We keep away from R3 until noon, and keep ourselves happy with our own record collections and streaming services, and the Beeb can claim another victory in the fight against "elitism".


But it doesn't have to be like this. There is an argument - which I would support - that there should be a radio station which does broadcast a non-genre(s)-specific range of Musics continually across the day, where Coltrane would be followed by Mendelssohn then Mongolian overtone singing then Bowie then Ghanaian drumming then Stockhausen then Henry Hall etc etc etc. There is another argument (which I have made on the Forum on many occasions) for a digital "R3Xtra" station, in which the type of broadcasting that some of us prefer can be accessed alongside the current R3, rather than replacing it, thus serving the needs and requirements of all types of listener. If the Beeb seriously wanted to cater for as many listeners as it could get, there are opportunities to achieve this.

If.

[gradus]

The "something" is that the audience for such "mood enhancers" is no longer being served by R2 where, on programmes like Family Favourites, Your 100 Best Tunes, These You Have Loved, and various programmes presented by David Jacobs, such listeners used to be catered for in the '50s & '60s. And the Beeb, instead of maintaining R3 as a unique, "minority interest" station for Musics from the Western Classical Traditions (and non-Western Classical traditions, and the heavier-duty Jazz developments) responded to the CFM "threat" by aping its presentation style (and filching some of its presenters) in a manic chase for higher numbers of listeners.


Carol Channing and Hello, Dolly "can belong on R3", gradus? How come? What is in that particular number that makes it suitable for even "occasional" inclusion on R3? And why not on R1? Or R6?

But those of us who think in this way have "lost" the argument - and, as a result, R3 has lost us as listeners. The current mentality behind the BBC means that there'll be the "occasional" playing of Flash, Bang, Wallop - or whatever - when whichsoever singer dies (and I hope that Mr Steele is with us for many, many more years) - and people genuinely baffled as to why some of us share the kernel's objections (preferring to listen to a Haydn String Quartet), and who think we should just shut up and leave them to their own pleasures.

I've lost the argument if R3 was/is intended to play only classical music but I don't think it was ever intended that it should forever be a sectarian refuge for the classical music-minded, resisting everything else. It seems reasonable to suppose that it takes as much creative genius to write a great show as it does to write a great string quartet and I can't see why an occasional foray into music theatre in any way diminishes R3 but I accept that others see it differently.

[french frank]

CFM provides one example of how classical music has evolved into a source of short pieces taken from complete works, often used as birthday request tunes, mood enhancers and for 'relaxation'. It wasn't like that in the 1950's so something has evolved. I think some music can belong on either R2 or R3. My point was that each station 's character is not significantly changed by occasionally playing music notionally associated with the other.

It isn't the music (classical or other) that's evolved in that case: it's the appearance of CFM which chooses to broadcast music in that way. That is not in itself a reason why Radio 3 should do the same thing. It's a reason why it shouldn't.

I like listening to jazz and some musicals, and I don't think I stand much chance of finding much of either other than on Radio 3, which is therefore, at least as far as I'm concerned, offering a valuable service on an occasional and modest scale.

Jazz is broadcast on jazz programmes (classical music isn't). Having an entire morning (including Essential Classics), publicised as being 'classical music' programmes, while there's mixing and matching of various styles, is a recipe for complaints: most people who are devoted to jazz aren't listening to it, people who aren't interested in jazz have to listen to it (or turn off what they do like), so the only section of the station audience which enjoys it consists of those who enjoy mixing and matching. It would be better to have an extra jazz programme.

I like listening to Haydn String Quartets (I can take a Joke as well as the next man), but not at breakfast time.

Station policy should not be predicated on the basis of what one person likes: others who share your view about jazz and musicals might also like Haydn String Quartets in the morning!

[french frank]

I've lost the argument if R3 was/is intended to play only classical music but I don't think it was ever intended that it should forever be a sectarian refuge for the classical music-minded, resisting everything else. It seems reasonable to suppose that it takes as much creative genius to write a great show as it does to write a great string quartet and I can't see why an occasional foray into music theatre in any way diminishes R3 but I accept that others see it differently.

This dodges the point. No one has suggested that Radio 3 should not play jazz (or other musics). The station treats jazz more seriously than any other BBC station - and so it should. But that isn't the same as having 'jazz programmes' for jazz, and 'classical programmes' for classical and anything else that someone might like. Radio 3 is the only station whose principal function is to play classical music. If it can treat jazz and world music programmes seriously - with dedicated jazz/world enthusiasts as presenters, why can't it treat classical programmes in the same way?

I would never suggest that a breakfast programme should have nothing but full-length pieces, but five and a half hours of morning programming which seldom has a piece longer than 10 minutes is not treating the music seriously. The first half of Breakfast might well recognise that people are unlikely to be able to sit and listen intently to a longer piece, though why is catching just part of a work NOT okay but listening to a single movement is acceptable? If you have to leave home or the room before a work finishes - why don't you just GO? You will anyway, even if a work is only 10 minutes long. I just don't believe people govern their morning comings and goings according to the beginnings and ends of pieces of music.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I've lost the argument if R3 was/is intended to play only classical music but I don't think it was ever intended that it should forever be a sectarian refuge for the classical music-minded, resisting everything else. It seems reasonable to suppose that it takes as much creative genius to write a great show as it does to write a great string quartet and I can't see why an occasional foray into music theatre in any way diminishes R3 but I accept that others see it differently.

I think that you are protesting against an argument that hasn't been made, gradus - the kernel in #7802 (ahh; they don't write numbers like that any more) did not say that all "occasional foray[s] into Music Theatre" should be "banned", but that this particular item was (to paraphrase) "loathsome" - an opinion with which Bbm agreed. The fact that Bernstein, Sondheim and others have written superb Music for the Musical Theatre (which some of us here have studied and taught to "A"-level Music students alongside Shostakovich, RVW, Schumann, Brahms etc etc - which I mention just to add a smidgen of spicy virtue-signalling) is irrelevant to the comments that "Hello, Dolly" as an individual item is inappropriate on the R3 schedules. For the reasons I've given previously, I agree with this opinion.

So far, nobody has come up with an argument to suggest why they think it might be appropriate for the R3 schedules (I don't count "Well, I like it" as an "argument") - instead, they've defended The Hollywood Musical as a genre from an imaginary attack.

[gradus]

This dodges the point. No one has suggested that Radio 3 should not play jazz (or other musics). The station treats jazz more seriously than any other BBC station - and so it should. But that isn't the same as having 'jazz programmes' for jazz, and 'classical programmes' for classical and anything else that someone might like. Radio 3 is the only station whose principal function is to play classical music. If it can treat jazz and world music programmes seriously - with dedicated jazz/world enthusiasts as presenters, why can't it treat classical programmes in the same way?

I would never suggest that a breakfast programme should have nothing but full-length pieces, but five and a half hours of morning programming which seldom has a piece longer than 10 minutes is not treating the music seriously. The first half of Breakfast might well recognise that people are unlikely to be able to sit and listen intently to a longer piece, though why is catching just part of a work NOT okay but listening to a single movement is acceptable? If you have to leave home or the room before a work finishes - why don't you just GO? You will anyway, even if a work is only 10 minutes long. I just don't believe people govern their morning comings and goings according to the beginnings and ends of pieces of music.

Isn't part of the answer that Essential Classics is not called Essential Classical Music and unsurprisingly can therefore select great performances from genres other than classical music. Henry Wood had much the same idea with the music included in the early Proms as did his predecessors in public concert promotion.

[LMcD]

Isn't part of the answer that Essential Classics is not called Essential Classical Music and unsurprisingly can therefore select great performances from genres other than classical music. Henry Wood had much the same idea with the music included in the early Proms as did his predecessors in public concert promotion.

It looks as though contributors to this subject are divided between those who are concerned with what Radio 3 possibly ought to be and those who (more or less happily) accommodate themselves to what it has actually become. I've never really thought of it a station that is meant to broadcast classical music and nothing else, any more than I've ever really thought of Radio 4 as a station that broadcasts speech programmes and nothing else. Presumably some would argue that there should be no dramas on Radio 3 either?

[french frank]

Isn't part of the answer that Essential Classics is not called Essential Classical Music and unsurprisingly can therefore select great performances from genres other than classical music.

They do proclaim (as part of their Trade Description): "Refresh your morning with a great selection of classical music". Your argument would be about as devious as Roger Wright's response when he was reminded that he used to say that the difference between R3 and CFM was that 'we play complete works': he replied, 'We do play complete works, but we play single movements as well …" But CFM could claim that too.

Henry Wood had much the same idea with the music included in the early Proms as did his predecessors in public concert promotion.

True, but that was over 100 years ago when he and Newman wanted to 'create an audience' for classical music. They did create that audience, and 50 years later the Third Programme was launched to serve that very audience. Radio 3 in the past played mainly classical music for that dedicated classical audience, while finding airtime for music to suit other audiences. Now, it predominantly serves other audiences, but finds some airtime for the classical audience, total time made to seem respectable by broadcasting six hours right through the night..

[french frank]

I've never really thought of it a station that is meant to broadcast classical music and nothing else, any more than I've ever really thought of Radio 4 as a station that broadcasts speech programmes and nothing else. Presumably some would argue that there should be no dramas on Radio 3 either?

You haven't read my earlier response: no one is saying that Radio 3 should only play classsical music. The problem is having a sometimes indiscriminate ("Hello Dolly") mix of different genres - which only really serves those who want a mix, not those who want to listen to classical, jazz, world, musical theatre &c. Jazz fans have jazz programmes.

[gradus]

They do proclaim (as part of their Trade Description): "Refresh your morning with a great selection of classical music". Your argument would be about as devious as Roger Wright's response when he was reminded that he used to say that the difference between R3 and CFM was that 'we play complete works': he replied, 'We do play complete works, but we play single movements as well …" But CFM could claim that too.

True, but that was over 100 years ago when he and Newman wanted to 'create an audience' for classical music. They did create that audience, and 50 years later the Third Programme was launched to serve that very audience. Radio 3 in the past played mainly classical music for that dedicated classical audience, while finding airtime for music to suit other audiences. Now, it predominantly serves other audiences, but finds some airtime for the classical audience, total time made to seem respectable by broadcasting six hours right through the night..

Admittedly slightly shifty but not irrelevant.
You seem to concede that a broadly inclusive approach that includes music from other genres was one way to build a classical audience in the 19th century, but not for some reason, now that R3 exists. I think I've misunderstood your point that R3 serves 'predominantly ...other audiences'. Perhaps I listen to a different R3.

[oddoneout]

They do proclaim (as part of their Trade Description): "Refresh your morning with a great selection of classical music"

Doesn't say anything about 'only'...... (I would quibble about describing it as a 'great' selection though, as I think they could do a lot better even within the confines of the format)
For those who don't like/don't listen to the morning schedule(for all sorts of perfectly valid reasons, many of which I agree with) the question of the inclusion of 'non-classical' music is surely somewhat academic, other than as perhaps an indication of just how low the standards have slipped.
A bit of cross-genre linking can be interesting, but it needs to be done properly and be a true link, not just 'in the news today' shoehorning, which doesn't dispel prejudices about R3 content or demonstrate open-mindedness, and probably irritates a good few of the target audience, as well as lost cause R3 listeners such as myself. On occasion brings to mind MPs trying to demonstrate they know anything about 'the people' or 'popular culture'.

[oddoneout]

Admittedly slightly shifty but not irrelevant.
You seem to concede that a broadly inclusive approach that includes music from other genres was one way to build a classical audience in the 19th century, but not for some reason, now that R3 exists. I think I've misunderstood your point that R3 serves 'predominantly ...other audiences'. Perhaps I listen to a different R3.

Well it's a different one to that of years gone by, and the differences are at the root of the criticisms of the morning schedules. The music played may fall into the category of 'classical' but it is parts of rather than complete works, and interspersed with non-essential/irrelevant items, and this is not acceptable for many - that is not meant in a derogatory sense BTW.