The RW Legacy

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

yep RW is the menu juggler of all time and quite possibly believes you can't please all the people all the time judging by his talk at the end of the pop up at the Southbank Centre .... but it is amazing how many people he can pee off for so long innit?

never mind AUNT is going down the tubes if not this round then the next ... what was that rhyme about Nurse?

Portillo on Patten

[DracoM]

If nothing else, RW's tenure has concentrated the mind wonderfully, and maybe from that point of view, the increasing grumbling and despair both public and private would seem to suggest that some kind of re-assertion of values may be needed. Patten is going, Wright is going, new DG incoming, Charter Review upcoming. 'May you live in interesting times'?

RW's controllership has incrementally taught us what we have missed, what we have valued and will continue to value in R3's output, and made us re-think what we expect of a platform like R3. We have to believe that a policy of steady reneging on the fundamental principles of education, information and entertainment is a deliberate one, authorised from the top. Content has been ratcheted down, schedules at times counter-intuitively changed all based on assumptions made at the BBC about the role of a cultural / music channel that many of us have found puzzling and dismaying.

Analytic elucidation, thoughtful comparisons, and well-informed educated link work that is not mere gush and me me me presentation style would NOT seem to be what the man wanted. The more you dilute, the less challenging you make your network offer, the less it is respected, adhered to, seen as a gold standard, and supported - it becomes merely one of the many. And the advent of internet classical stations all over the world available at a click means that many listeners now have huge options. They do not have to listen to R3 at all. Thus, if you make R3 sufficiently anonymous / repetitive and unadventurous in content, and happy-clappy in style of presentation, and present no shock of the new or careful analysis of the best of the old, you run the very real risk of making R3 merely a tiny part of the peloton rather than a likely yellow jersey.

The tragic shame in all this is that the BBC has enormous resources, enviable archives, access to serious experts and could thus make R3 a real front runner in terms of how to present and contextualise music in all manner of ways. Yet under RW they seem to have quite deliberately rejected this confident assertion of quality broadcasting. In an age where USP's are the key to marketing any product, that decision to get grubbing with the also-rans seems bizarrely wrong-headed. And at a time when you are getting your case together for a licence fee negotiation, a decision to steadily dilute a USP of excellence as even a small but significant part of your spectrum of products would seem to be self-destructive.

The impression given by current R3 stance is that it has lost all confidence in itself, all sense of identity, and is now paranoid about being thought 'good', knows not which route to take, and has adopted styles of presentation and programme formulae that ape CFM / R1/R2. You can see the logic: music programming is simple: bang on the tracks, make presenters smiley and chatty and informal, et voila, R3 is alive!! Really? What do you mean by ‘alive’? I’d say ‘drowning not waving’.

Except that R1 / R2 are always to a degree and of their nature juggling ephemera. They have developed confidence in handling that tricky area to perfection. They are very good at what they do. R3's remit is to deal with a plethora of musical traditions that have excited, driven. moved, changed and entertained people for literally a dozen or so centuries. The cultural contexts of such an archive are huge and as we get further away from those ages, they need careful re-analysis, re-interpretations and explanations. RW has by dint of the formulae imposed on the 6.30 a.m. - 7.30 p.m;. and maybe later some would say, gradually eroded an enriching awareness of the foundations of the culture. It is a betrayal of what R3 owes to the next generation. R3, like all good teachers and sprint relay team, has a responsibility to hand on the baton, the culture it received and enrich it by later re-examinations.

IMHO, RW has effectively sold R3 out to the frightened trivialisers, and we and our children and grandchildren will be the major losers.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

well said DracoM ... i would add greedy and careerist Pepsi merchants to your characterisation of 'trivialisers'

[french frank]

You can see the logic: music programming is simple: bang on the tracks, make presenters smiley and chatty and informal, et voila, R3 is alive!!

To be noted that last time the BBC Trust reviewed Radio 3 it was alongside Radio 4 and 7. Apparently, this year it will be alongside the other 'music stations' which it has been studiously seeking to copy.

Which BBC radio station is now the epitome of public service broadcasting? Why, Radio 4, of course, though Radio 1 does reach a large percentage of the younger generation and Radio 2 is 'the nation's favourite' - recording by far the highest listening figures and therefore best fulfilling the expectations of most licence fee payers.

Radio 3 and what it stood for appears to be nowhere when it comes to anything more than lip service.

[gurnemanz]

"If nothing else, RW's tenure has concentrated the mind wonderfully, and maybe from that point of view, the increasing grumbling and despair both public and private would seem to suggest that some kind of re-assertion of values may be needed. Patten is going, Wright is going, new DG incoming, Charter Review upcoming. 'May you live in interesting times'? "

... and interesting points as usual from Draco. As I fumble my way towards old age, I am forced to witness the crumbling not only of the Beeb but more crucially of the NHS .. also the possible disintegration of the UK as the Scots jump ship and the dissolution of our role in Europe as the UKIP tail wags the national dog. The main stuff I listen to on R3 now are the concerts, CotW and Late Junction which represents my only radio contact with non-classical music.

"The more you dilute, the less challenging you make your network offer, the less it is respected, adhered to, seen as a gold standard, and supported - it becomes merely one of the many. And the advent of internet classical stations all over the world available at a click means that many listeners now have huge options. They do not have to listen to R3 at all. Thus, if you make R3 sufficiently anonymous / repetitive and unadventurous in content, and happy-clappy in style of presentation, and present no shock of the new or careful analysis of the best of the old, you run the very real risk of making R3 merely a tiny part of the peloton rather than a likely yellow jersey."

It strikes me that a bit like Cameron also faced with a brash new populist adversary, Radio 3 has been reduced to adopting undignified positions it does not really believe in and stealing its rival's clothes rather than having the confidence to assert itself.

[aeolium]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but there are a few disparaging comments on Wright's legacy in the Letters page of the Guardian today:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jul/07/roger-wright-approach-wrong-radio-three

[french frank]

Oe-er ... well, Alan B is supporting us even if one of the online commenters said of FoR3 : "But I am glad Roger Wright is going as he has steadily moved the station towards that noisy and backward-looking group at 'Friends of Radio 3'" He also appeared to blame us for there being three operas a week instead of one, and loads of Bach ... It is a tiny bit annoying (but we did persuade Mark Damazer to recant for turning everything on its head: 'no jazz, no world, no speechy stuff &c &c').

Such is life.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Not sure if this is the right thread, ...

It certainly is. Thank you for that link, aeo...

[kernelbogey]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but there are a few disparaging comments on Wright's legacy in the Letters page of the Guardian today:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/201...ng-radio-three

These were a response to this editorial in the 5 July Guardian, including some admiration for this Forum.

[french frank]

These were a response to this editorial in the 5 July Guardian, including some admiration for this Forum.

I think we've discussed this. I did laugh (if slightly mirthlessly) at the description of FoR3 as that 'noisy, backward-looking group': we are responsible for Roger Wright's strategy which has moved towards what we want, that includes putting on three operas a week, too much Bach, too little contemporary music and too late at night. At other times we've been accused of protesting at the amount of jazz, world music and 'speechy stuff'. And the geezer at Resonance accused us of being responsible for the Radio 3 axeing Mixing It.

All of these are the precise opposite of what we have said but one psychological fact emerges: people look at all the things they DISLIKE/DISAPPROVE OF about Radio 3, and blame us rather than Radio 3 (which tamely follows our every command!).

[french frank]

And, by the way, my attention has been drawn to another Guardian letter vis-à-vis the RW legacy, yesterday:

"A splendid alternative to Radio 3's abysmal morning chat show (Letters, 8 July) is WQXR, New York's classical music station. Easily accessible through a free app such as TuneIn, this station offers an inventive repertoire of complete works, succintly and intelligently introduced."

[Barbirollians]

And, by the way, my attention has been drawn to another Guardian letter vis-à-vis the RW legacy, yesterday:

"A splendid alternative to Radio 3's abysmal morning chat show (Letters, 8 July) is WQXR, New York's classical music station. Easily accessible through a free app such as TuneIn, this station offers an inventive repertoire of complete works, succintly and intelligently introduced."

Is it on Sonos internet radio I wonder ?