Doonelm

[Magnificat]

raison d'être[/I] of the board is really to discuss broadcast Choral Evensongs.

Choral Evensong, The Choir and all matters choral it says!!

My remarks about the appointment of an outstanding choir - trainer who had never, apparently, produced an outstanding cathedral choir ( or for that matter parish church choir ) of men and boys was, of course, made in the context of the recent broadcast CE from Worcester.

Don't worry, I'll abide by the rules in future albeit with my teeth firmly gritted!!

VCC

[kernelbogey]

[...] To me, a presenter *should be* someone with specialist knowledge who contributes (along with a producer) a good deal of the information/comment/viewpoint/insight to a programme which expands significantly beyond the mere playing of a succession of pieces of music. At the moment it's hard to think of too many programmes of that type. Perhaps CotW, but that veers towards 'documentary' (I think that's its technical description). I don't think Donald MacLeod is a musicological specialist, but he is clearly involved with the research aspects of the programme and is capable of discussing intelligently with any guests[....]

I take the view that the presenter's skills should include that of being able to name a composer or work in one of the main European languages in a reasonably accurate manner (not necessarily perfectly). On this basis, and after some thought, I criticised a particular presenter by name on another thread for lack of this skill in one particular language; adding that this presenter was, in my view, unsuitable for a particular broadcast. I thought that legitimate, but am not clear from the above whether you would agree, FF.

[Don Petter]

In other words, it's fair to criticise (or nitpick if you don't care very much) that particular point. You don't go on to say that the presenter is a total incompetent and what on earth is R3 doing employing such a person. Or you might say that but it comes over as a bit of a rant instead of a reasonable point.

I take the view that the presenter's skills should include that of being able to name a composer or work in one of the main European languages in a reasonably accurate manner (not necessarily perfectly). On this basis, and after some thought, I criticised a particular presenter by name on another thread for lack of this skill in one particular language; adding that this presenter was, in my view, unsuitable for a particular broadcast. I thought that legitimate, but am not clear from the above whether you would agree, FF.

I think both these points of view seem legitimate, but they illustrate that there is a subjective grey area within which it is difficult to position a hard and fast rule which satisfies everyone's idea of 'fair play'. This was the point which came to mind and sparked my #47.

Ultimately, it is ff who should decide. We all seemed to jog along pretty happily until this thread hove into view, but it would be useful to know if the goalposts have been moved, so that we can avoid inadvertent transgressions.

[french frank]

Your query was perfectly logical in the context, DP. But the original point arose because of 1) the narrow focus of the CE board and 2) the nature of the membership which the board had therefore attracted, and which is largely distinct from the main membership of the forum.

On foreign pronunciation I take both a purist and a tolerant view. In an ideal world Radio 3 presenters should be coached in the basics of pronunciation in, at least, the main languages. Those who have an aptitude for languages will almost certainly want to attempt accuracy in any language they're called upon to pronounce. On the other hand, there will be those who find foreign pronunciation very hard to master and remember (dare one say, perhaps, older people especially?). If they have a wide knowledge to balance that, then 'we purists' must put up with the regular horrors .

I don't think, though, that younger, university educated presenters have much of an excuse for not making the effort, particularly if they don't seem to have much else to offer than a self-assured broadcasting manner.

[Don Petter]

Thanks, ff. It's probably then just me confusing a board with the Forum as a whole.

Agree with you in general about pronunciation, though I think that any regular broadcaster, irrespective of age or education, should make the effort! Am I right that the BBC Pronunciation Unit went the way of the dinosaur a while ago?

[french frank]

Am I right that the BBC Pronunciation Unit went the way of the dinosaur a while ago?

Not at all! In the Birt era they took to charging for each enquiry, but, thankfully, that went some while ago.

I think, though, that it's probably most useful for individual names/words that arise just occasionally. They can't undertake to coach presenters every time a German title comes up, or explain yet again how to say Trpčeski

[Don Petter]

Good to hear I was wrong, but then I take your point - that memory must therefore come into play for the regular pitfalls.

[kernelbogey]

[...]I don't think, though, that younger, university educated presenters have much of an excuse for not making the effort, particularly if they don't seem to have much else to offer than a self-assured broadcasting manner.

Quelle élégance! And in the basement, too!
kb

[bach736]

Time was when R3 announcers / presenters had to pass an audition in the main languages.
'How quaint!' I hear you say.