As Radio 4 becomes ever more annoying and 4extra’s continuity announcers not much better, I’ve been listening to archive radio plays and serials on BBC Sounds. By giving us access to these older productions, the BBC is, presumably unintentionally, providing a clear demonstration of how much better they are than the majority of what we are being given today.
For a start, in the older productions, the lines are generally delivered more clearly; the actors, by and large, have better diction and vocal technique and the background noise or sound effects, having been used to establish the location, are muted or reduced while they speak. There is less reliance on gimmickry too; while random repetition, self-narration, choral speaking and other over-theatrical and experimental techniques will get you high grades in GCSE Drama or favourable reviews in the Guardian, they can become intrusive in most radio drama settings, particularly in adaptations of the classics and older texts.
Above all, the older dramatisations are relatively free from the BBC’s now seemingly endless attempts to shoehorn propaganda into everything. This is annoying at the best of times but feels like a violation when a much-loved favourite falls victim. I seldom go so far as to swear at the radio but the Radio 4 dramatisation of ‘The Cruel Sea’ a few years ago elicited one such outburst when a passage in Monsarrat’s book condemning the vulgar ‘Spivs and Flash Harrys’ profiteering from petrol brought in by oil tanker at the cost of human lives was radically altered to a snide complaint about ‘fat cats and businessmen’ using the hard-won petrol to ‘drive their Jaguars’ to golf clubs, race meetings and pheasant shoots. In the same way, the few scenes of ‘The Kraken Wakes’ which I caught by chance on a car journey were so heavily larded with pious references to climate change that I switched it off again in disgust.
Most of the manipulation is less overt than this, of course, but it is only when you listen to adaptations from decades ago that you realise how frequent it is in today’s output: like the proverbial boiling frogs, we have been subjected to the intrusion of modernising revision and political or environmental orthodoxy in creeping increments to the point that we simply don’t realise how much of it is going on or even notice it unless some particularly egregious example crops up. The same thing has been happening in television; compare the excellent - and generally faithful - 1980s adaptations of ‘Pride and Prejudice’ or ‘Barchester Towers’ with today’s ‘Great Expectations’, complete with added explicit drug-taking and contrived references to the slave trade.
A. A. Milne, when he turned ‘The Wind in the Willows’ into ‘Toad of Toad Hall’, compared adapting a well-loved classic to leaving fingerprints in someone else’s bread and butter and recommended as light a touch as possible; by contrast, the BBC is not merely manhandling our cultural sustenance but dropping the plate on the floor and treading it into the carpet with muddy boots, while never missing an opportunity to preach at us through the medium of entertainment and doubtless enjoying a collective sense of righteous self-satisfaction that all of this is is entirely for our own good.
As an antidote, I suggest the three-part serial which prompted this post, an adaptation of James Hilton’s 1933 novel ‘Lost Horizon’, recorded in 1981 with Derek Jacobi in the lead role; the plot is followed faithfully, it is free of gimmicks and you can hear every word. More importantly, despite being partially set in British India and other far-flung parts of the empire, it is mercifully free from the kind of anachronistic multiculturalism and condemnation of the Raj that the BBC would doubtless see fit to inject were it being made today. If you know the book and it interests you, I recommend you listen while you can, before the Corporation’s Thought Police spot this dangerously subversive recording and withdraw it from public access.
From overhearing it as my Mum listened I came to the conclusion that there was no propaganda source to equal "Mrs Dale's Diary". Information for the greater good was slipped in, always arranged so that the scruff were Cockneys and their betters spoke down to them in RP.
ReplyDeleteGood point! Certainly there is a long tradition of creating radio drama plot-lines in order to convey a message - ‘The Archers’ springs inevitably to mind along with ‘Citizens’ (although I’m not entirely sure what the purpose of the latter was beyond exploring hitherto unplumbed depths of tedium) and, say, in a country at war, one could understand and approve of the reasoning behind it.
DeleteIn the present day, I don’t really mind what they get up to with their own creations - some are very good, and, for the rest, there’s always the ‘off’ button - but I do wish they’d keep their mucky paws off the classics.
I have a suspicion that the BBC genuinely sees itself as an organisation for the dissemination of propaganda. Not in so many words, but in the sense that is sees "politically correct" as synonymous with "correct".
ReplyDeleteIn that sense it is "correcting" older material, not mutilating it. Like an old cookery recipe, it has to be adapted to modern tastes.
As if BBC people don't value the past at all, don't think the past has anything to teach them. It's all very weird, but I think the BBC is weird and it attracts weird people. Some deeply unpleasant people too.
An interesting - if worrying - idea; I suppose that, for some, there is little or no difference between removing terms which would now be seen as offensive - now almost universal in broadcast and publishing - and rewriting or replacing passages which they see as outdated or with which they disagree.
DeleteI think it may be more than not valuing the past; there’s more than a touch of 1984 in the way that history is being selectively reported and portrayed:
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”