An Oldie view of the Proms

[Pianophile]

Can this quote from RO's article please be printed off in very large letters and circulated to all BBC Radio 3 and indeed the televised Proms presenters:

"The downside, for those of us listening at home, will be Radio 3’s presentation, with its unstoppable barrage of chatter and hype. The shouting of prepared quotes over applause, when all one wants is pause for thought. And, even worse, all those gushing endorsements. As Ponsonby says in his essay on the subject ‘An Abortive Campaign’, ‘It really isn’t the job of the presenter to evaluate the work or the performance.’"

Spot on, Richard! :)

Well said!

[french frank]

Can this quote from RO's article please be printed off in very large letters and circulated to all BBC Radio 3 and indeed the televised Proms presenters:

"The downside, for those of us listening at home, will be Radio 3’s presentation, with its unstoppable barrage of chatter and hype. The shouting of prepared quotes over applause, when all one wants is pause for thought. And, even worse, all those gushing endorsements. As Ponsonby says in his essay on the subject ‘An Abortive Campaign’, ‘It really isn’t the job of the presenter to evaluate the work or the performance.’"

Spot on, Richard! :)

I've just read this chapter, and among other things Ponsonby says he wrote to RW in 2013 about the fact that 'you aren't going to appoint a Music Presentation Editor while making colleagues redundant'. If I remember, Cormac Rigby was once the 'Presentation Guru', overseeing and advising other presenters; and later I think Donald Macleod did it.

I liked the intro to this chapter: "Just as I've always been fussy about the mounting and framing of pictures, I have cared even more intensely about the broadcast presentation of music - the framing of it."

It should (my view) be something that positively enhances the experience of music, a Value Added, not something specially tailored to persuade the unwilling, apprehensive, sceptical to listen in the first place; or, at the very least, not 'put them off'.

In a previous letter (2007) Ponsonby had written: "I guess your presenters are encouraged to be informal, chatty, even matey, so that the accidental listener to R3 is not put off by 'posh' accents, 'highbrow' statements, a lofty manner. As a result, I fear that listeners of ordinary intelligence are talked down to. For example, a (female) presenter told us recently, 'it was the slow movement that stole my heart away': a sick-bag, please."

However, in the 2013 letter Ponsonby said he had resolved never to write to RW in censorious terms again because 'my previous letters haven't had the smallest influence …'

Exactly. The reason why FoR3 had little influence*** on RW was because we were complaining about issues which had apparently become articles of faith with him and at the wider BBC.

***The man himself once said we had had 'more influence than we thought'. In what way he didn't elaborate

[Andrew Slater]

If I remember, Cormac Rigby was once the 'Presentation Guru', overseeing and advising other presenters; and later I think Donald Macleod did it.

I think Piers Burton-Page took over from Cormac Rigby.

In checking this, I came across this blog, which contains audio samples of many of the announcers recorded at a time when there was a presentation editor. Listening to them, it's clear that there was no straitjacket (or even dinner jacket) applied, just a general, overall consistency of tone.

[french frank]

In checking this, I came across this blog, which contains audio samples of many of the announcers recorded at a time when there was a presentation editor. Listening to them, it's clear that there was no straitjacket (or even dinner jacket) applied, just a general, overall consistency of tone.

Lovely clip from John Holmstrom! (I wonder who 'Steve' was who gave FoR3 a link - which still works).

Yes, considering the various voices in their chronological context, the voices varied from quite formal to not-very-formal-at-all. Above all, there was the understanding that announcing was an art and needed training. Just as someone who sings in opera needs training, and needs to reach a level of expertise in their art.

A (good) general broadcaster still needs a certain amount of direction to make a satisfactory Radio 3 presenter. I think.

[Vile Consort]

I have an interesting off-air recording from the 1970's (which alas I can no longer play as it's on reel-to-reel tape and I haven't got anything to play it back on). It is of organ music by Georg Boehm, played by Graham Barber. I think the presenter was Peter Barker.

What's interesting about it is that the presentation has manged to slip through being edited. So, in addition to hearing the presenter correcting slips, we can hear him rewriting the presentation on the fly. For instance, after a sentence that doesn't quite work we hear him say sotto voce "no, that's not quite right ... what I meant to say was ..." and then re-phrasing what he's just said to get it quite right.

He is making some quite recondite points in this presentation - e.g. what were chorale partitas ("or rather, chorale partite") of this period composed for? Did they have some part in the Lutheran service? If not, then what was their purpose?

It's clear that he has done some research about these pieces, written a script, and then honed it in the course of recording it. I'm not sure the current presenters would be capable of doing that.

As I've said many a time, in those days you could get quite a decent musical education by listening to Radio 3.

[DublinJimbo]

As I've said many a time, in those days you could get quite a decent musical education by listening to Radio 3.

So true. One experience I remember clearly was a wonderful programme of organ music by Messiaen, a composer I hadn't heard of at the time. The introductions were really good, informative about both music and composer. This broadcast (which would have been in the 1960s, I'd say) single-handedly began a fascination with Messiaen which continues to this day.

[kernelbogey]

...in those days you could get quite a decent musical education by listening to Radio 3.

I can confidently ascribe the greater part of my musical education to the Third, and Radio 3, and to the scripts of such as Peter Barker, Piers Burton-Page, Cormac Rigby et al.

It's possibly unfair to imply that current presenters do not or cannot research the music to the same extent as in 'the good old days' - but what has changed apparently irredeemably is the tone of presention, to one of a blend of populism and condescencion.

[Alison]

Is there any chance that matters will one day come full circle with a return to higher standards?

[Sir Velo]

So true. One experience I remember clearly was a wonderful programme of organ music by Messiaen, a composer I hadn't heard of at the time. The introductions were really good, informative about both music and composer. This broadcast (which would have been in the 1960s, I'd say) single-handedly began a fascination with Messiaen which continues to this day.

You're so right. I particularly recall a fascinating series of introductions by Misha Donat to each of the books of Liszt's Annees de Pelerinage which elegantly explained the literary and geographical inspirations behind the music.

Now, no doubt, we'd just get something like "I hope you will love this stunning piece by Liszt as much as I do. Oh and I've just had a tweet from Mrs Lee that her cocker spaniel always hides under the table during "Orage"."

[oddoneout]

and to the scripts of such as Peter Barker, Piers Burton-Page, Cormac Rigby et al.

Oh happy days...
I too hate the shouting and emoting at the end of performances, and now find myself having to leap up and turn the sound right down - perhaps I ought to consider a remote when I get around to replacing my sound system to prevent doing myself a mischief.

[EdgeleyRob]

Is there any chance that matters will one day come full circle with a return to higher standards?

Probably not Alison.

[seabright]

I wonder how many "oldies" are still around who, as enthusiastic youngsters, attended a Prom fifty years ago given by a world famous conductor who stopped their roof-raising reception of his performance of Tchaikovsky's 5th with the words "beautiful silence!"? ... He then told them they were the most wonderful audience he'd ever conducted and looked forward to returning the following year "if the gods permit." A Prommer called out "I give them sanction" to which the maestro replied "Mephisto!" and then gave the happy throng a Mussorgsky encore.

If I tell you that this famous conductor had given the US premieres of Mahler's 8th Symphony, Schoenberg's "Gurrelieder", Berg's "Wozzeck", Stravinsky's "Rite of Spring", the last three Sibelius symphonies, four of Shostakovich's, Rachmaninov's 3rd Symphony and "Paganini" Rhapsody, Elgar's 2nd Symphony, Vaughan Williams's 9th and Charles Ives's 4th, plus many hundreds more, you'll have probably guessed who he was. So, was anyone in these forums at that concert all those years ago? ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEXYydmnQIs

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

It's possibly unfair to imply that current presenters do not or cannot research the music to the same extent as in 'the good old days' - but what has changed apparently irredeemably is the tone of presention, to one of a blend of populism and condescencion.

In general, this is true, but one presenter in particular shows her lack of research/knowledge repeatedly.

Is there any chance that matters will one day come full circle with a return to higher standards?

I hope so, but I can't imagine this without a significant regime change.

[oddoneout]

This is straying somewhat from the OP, but as I see it, having turned the morning output into R3 Lite, it's about time that the afternoon became 'Real Radio 3' - fullfat, organic, slow, thought-provoking, whatever, but more like the Radio 3/Third programme that the original audience appreciated the station for. There are still a great many folks out there who are capable of listening for more than a few minutes at a time, and - shock horror - who are prepared to use their brain cells, rather than needing soundbites and huge(shades of Kenny Everett's giant hands!) clues as to what to think or feel.
The success on TV of several 'unlikely' presenters and programmes is proof of that appetite.

[Nick Armstrong]

The success on TV of several 'unlikely' presenters and programmes is proof of that appetite.

Would be interested to know who you had in mind there, odds.