music & society
August 2010 » As part of its campaigning intention, musoc.org finds it appropriate to respond to (rare) public consultations of the sort currently underway at the BBC Trust, namely a review of the service provided by BBC Radio 3 (and Radios 4 & 7).
It goes without saying that the Trust has an obligation only to read all suggestions and opinions offered up by the public, not actually to act upon any. Nevertheless, musoc.org urges anyone who cares about the future of art music - not just in the UK, but worldwide - to submit their opinions to the Trust (it may only take 10 minutes). Closing date is August 26th.
Meanwhile, many subscribers to Anti-pop, as well as other correspondents, are listeners (often longstanding) of BBC Radio 3, and on that basis musoc.org has submitted its own set of responses. Whilst the opinions offered (see below) are not necessarily those of all or any of musoc.org's supporters, they will be broadly representative; moreover, they will undoubtedly be more critical than any entertained by Friends of Radio 3, whose campaigning position is inevitably mitigated by its broad-church membership.
The questions that follow are those to which musoc.org has replied.
+ + + + + + +
Q3: Radio 3's main role is to broadcast high quality classical music ranging from the great composers to more exploratory work, with an emphasis on live and specially recorded music. How well do you think Radio 3 does this?
A. The station does this pretty well on the whole, though it seems blithely unaware that there are thousands more great composers outside the institutionally controlled 'standard repertoire'. Similarly there are hundreds of living composers negelected by Radio 3 whose music is of a sufficiently high quality to be broadcasted (indeed, championed) by the station.
Q4: Radio 3 also includes other styles of music such as jazz and world music. What do you think about this programming on Radio 3?
A. Unequivocally, it shouldn't be played on Radio 3 at all. One thousand years of art music deserves and needs a station all to itself - it shouldn't have to share it with anything.
Q5: What do you think about the range of music played on Radio 3?
A. It could be far greater. There is very little Early (pre-Baroque) music or music composed in the late 20th and 21st centuries, and almost no genuine folk music.
However, to repeat, there should be no jazz, pop, musical theatre or world music whatsoever.
Q6: What do you think of Radio 3's speech based programming which includes drama, arts and religion?
A. It's broadly praiseworthy, but it shouldn't be on Radio 3 - Radio 4 broadcasts much similar material already, and that's where the rest of it belongs.
Q7: Radio 3 features performances by the BBC orchestras and BBC Singers. What do you think of these performances on Radio 3?
A. These are generally of a high standard.
Q8: Radio 3 should help build appreciation of music and culture, particularly amongst people with little knowledge of classical music. How well do you think it does this?
A. It doesn't do this at all. Its various and continuous attempts at striking a 'populist' note alienate many (if not all) of those that aren't novices, which is, historically, the vast majority of the station's listenership.
Radio 3 can't educate like this on its own; there needs to be a concerted and sustained effort right across the BBC (including TV and online) to counteract the portrayal and projection of culture by all those media in competition with the BBC (and by the mass media in general).
Q9: What do you think of Radio 3's website?
It could be worse, but it should be far better - with more information, fewer space-filling graphics, more BBC-originated information, less lazy linking to Wikipedia, and stricter fact-checking (the recent hyperlinking of the 19th century composer Engelbert Humperdinck to a biography of the 1960s pop crooner (who borrowed the former's name) being a case in point). It could also be soberer or less 'postmodern' - e.g. not plastered with photos of inanely-grinning presenters or written in juvenile-friendly language.
Q11: Is there anything else you want to say about Radio 3?
A. Above all, Radio 3 should be a broadcaster of art music and nothing else. Its demeanour should be more serious, less middle-brow. It should seek out new management not obsessed with patronising populism, and more knowledgeable presenters, replacing those complicit in the ongoing dumbing-down (particularly Sean Rafferty, Petroc Trelawny, Rob Cowan, Sarah Walker, Sara Mohr-Pietsch, Katie Derham, Suzy Klein & Lucie Skeaping).
It could and should be a globally unique station, not a ragbag of programming afraid to acknowledge the historical importance and cultural high ground of what it broadcasts.
You can respond to this article at any time by emailing gro.cosum@srettel.