The 'oh no not another thread' thread

[ahinton]

Which is why I was asking people not to do it.

Indeed - that's understood, I think, by most of us here - innit?

Perhaps one of the problems here is that the very fact that there is little evidence of stylistic commonality in R3 presentation and that there are such diversities of approach between presenters is one reason why the very sense of "presenter styles" has risen to the fore to the extent that it has done, but then that's in part a symptom of the personality cult stuff that many of us either take or leave for granted, n'est-ce pas? I think that it goes farther than this, too - although, in so saying, I am perhaps revealing a personal prejudice - in that, for example, if asked to "say" something about my work, I tend to come across as reticent, not so much by reson of wishing to be secretive but because I don't feel that I have much to say and that if it's not all there in the music itself I've failed anyway; this may not be an especially apposite analogy, but I think that it may at least have some validity in the context of this issue.

[Quarky]

I'm going to suggest that this thread be given a rest from general discussion about one particular presenter. Next time there's a heinous factual or pronunciation error, feel free to share it. Otherwise batting on endlessly starts to give an impression of victimisation.

OK French Frank.

I think there are huge cultural issues thrown up by presenters and their manners of presentation, particularly acute with females. From which follows the questions "who are the listeners for whom this programme is intended? Should I be listening?"

There were two opposite extremes on Friday - 3.30 pm presenter X in TV personality mode, and presenter Y at 7.30 pm in stuffy mode.

The music itself for the whole of Friday afternoon and evening was absolutely brilliant.

The conclusion I draw is that presenters of concerts (not chat and magazine programmes) should make themselves anonymous as possible, lest they get in the way.

[cloughie]

OK French Frank.

I think there are huge cultural issues thrown up by presenters and their manners of presentation, particularly acute with females. From which follows the questions "who are the listeners for whom this programme is intended? Should I be listening?"

There were two opposite extremes on Friday - 3.30 pm presenter X in TV personality mode, and presenter Y at 7.30 pm in stuffy mode.

The music itself for the whole of Friday afternoon and evening was absolutely brilliant.

The conclusion I draw is that presenters of concerts (not chat and magazine programmes) should make themselves anonymous as possible, lest they get in the way.

I would not describe the evening presenter as stuffy, the warmth in her voice is welcoming but sticks to telling what is on.

[Quarky]

Speaking from memory, I found her discussion with Sean Rafferty of the forthcoming programme as somewhat stuffy, which coloured my subsequent listening.

But I agree that concert presenters should "stick to telling what is on".

[Flosshilde]

I think there are huge cultural issues thrown up by presenters and their manners of presentation, particularly acute with females. From which follows the questions "who are the listeners for whom this programme is intended? Should I be listening?"

[my emphasis]

What are these 'cultural issues' that are particularly acute with 'females'?

[Quarky]

OK Flosshilde. To my mind there are big issues here, but as I don't want to spend the whole weekend preparing a reply, I will give you an off the cuff response.

Firstly, voice patterns are a big clue to social background, and I certainly find female voices more distinctive in this regard. Whether this is because they pay more attention in general to developing an "accent" or whether the female voice is inherently more expressive than the male voice, I wouldn't know.

The UK has gone through a long period of social readjustment. I can remember when I first joined my particular profession, one main way of meeting in a social context other members of the profession, was to attend "Classics for Pleasure" concerts at the South Bank - Grieg's piano concerto, etc, etc. These days, the profession organises a pub concert at which compete rock bands formed from members of the profession.

Accent is of course much less distinctive than it used to be in the political and managerial classes, where classless accents are the rule. For example I would not accuse anyone within the present Conservative government of having a "posh" accent. Nevertheless social class is still a very important issue, as ever.

Music is of course a way of defining cultures of all types, and Classical music has historically been the music of the ruling class, middle class, and intellectual class. And since musicians and persons interested in music will be more sensitive to voice patterns, one may find more highly developed accents in the classical world. Of course this cuts both ways - for example some presenters on Radio 6 programmes go in the opposite direction in the sense that a less-posh voice is impossible to imagine.

I don't think this is an issue for BBC programmes in general, where classless accents are the rule. Further for most of the Radio 3 presenters this is not an issue. They either have a classless accent (SMP) or a posh accent (Sean Rafferty), but rise above any issue of accent signifying a whole set of social attitudes.

So as long as a presenter sticks to the musical matters in hand, their voice patterns or accent are irrelevant. But it must be very easy for a presenter to introduce something more in terms of a clue to a "social attitude". At that point as far as I am concerned, I don't want to know - I will go away and stand on my head, do some gardening, and forget about the problems and issues of British society.

[ahinton]

Oddball, I think that this is the first time that the question of accent rather than manner of presentation, content, &c. has been brought into the fray here - and I don't believe that this aspect has affected the views of most contributors. Sarah Walker has no accent? (not that the fact that she continues to betray her origins in South Yorkshire is an issue). That weird clipped "BBC English" thankfully disappeared from earshot years ago and it always sounded forced anyway; you certainly don't find it on Radio 3! I really don't think that what has exercised those who've posted to this thread has included mattes of "class", real or perceived - and I do not perceive a problem along these lines anyway.

[Nick Armstrong]

The conclusion I draw is that presenters of concerts (not chat and magazine programmes) should make themselves anonymous as possible, lest they get in the way.

I think I came across the worst ever example of failure to follow that conclusion... This week, Katie Derham was presenting an afternoon programme and I happened to switch on as she presented Scriabin's Piano Concerto (by-the-by, a really random choice for a programme about WW1 music, seemingly force-justified by the fact that the composer of this 1896 work happened to survive until 1915 and apparently towards the end of his life thought that the war might be Quite a Good Thing )

Anyway, dealing with the end of Scriabin's life, she said

"he developed... [hesitation and smiley voice] something rather unpleasant-sounding... an infected carbuncle, it says [embarrassed laugh ] on his lip"...

Apart from the crassly inappropriate amusement, it became painfully apparent that she was merely reading someone else's words, had never seen them before, certainly had no personal knowledge to draw on, and that all the little sing-song emphases, the banal improvisations ("rather unpleasant-sounding"), are all just a substitute for genuine involvement. Those two words "it says" were a real give-away.

Now I know presenters are there to read out the producers' scripts and for it to appear to be their knowledge speaking - but I suppose what I found shocking was that KD isn't professional enough to pull off the trick with anything approaching conviction (or, for that matter, good taste).

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

ah ... talent will out :rolleyes:

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Now I know presenters are there to read out the producers' scripts and for it to appear to be their knowledge speaking - but I suppose what I found shocking was that KD isn't professional enough to pull off the trick with anything approaching conviction (or, for that matter, good taste).

Yes - ignorance is forgivable, but the World War One "title" should at least have given her a hint that maybe the "chuckle sister" tone might not always be appropriate.

[teamsaint]

fine work there, Cals.
personally , I am boycotting KD since the last time i encountered her crassness, , or stupidity as I prefer to call it.

You could always email with a complaint.
I did.

they took my complaint seriously/ to be a joke/with a pinch of salt/to the council tip. Choose one of the above options.

[Word]

Those two words "it says" were a real give-away.

No doubt "it says" was a reference to the source of the information rather than her script, or is that too obvious an explanation?

[teamsaint]

Here Y'are

About 1 hour 54 mins in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b047zsyw

poor preparation and delivery .
imagine that description of Scriabins final days applied to somebody in the current news.

[Nick Armstrong]

Here Y'are

About 1 hour 54 mins in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b047zsyw

poor preparation and delivery .
imagine that description of Scriabins final days applied to somebody in the current news.

I don't think I exaggerated, did I?

[teamsaint]

I don't think I exaggerated, did I?

Nope.

Join the boycott.......!!