|
Post by Laurence Piper on Sept 7, 2004 18:34:04 GMT
It isn't even as simple a case as having a cup half-full / half-empty, Andrew. Surviving stuff is a real mix of the brilliant and the awful; you can't simply sit back and enjoy all of what's there (and be grateful for it) if it's dross / not to your taste. All the surviving editions of Maigret in the world don't make up for (for instance) the almost total lack of good pop archiving from the same period!
As you say though, it isn't the fault of current thinking by the archives that so much is missing (and I don't think anyone says otherwise). However, more effort needs to be made officially, rather than just leaving it to the fans to hand things to the archives on a plate. As said above, remarks about certain shows not being worthy of archiving in the first place are not helpful at all.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Doherty on Sept 7, 2004 20:12:55 GMT
Just to clarify a point or two.
The "desired programmes" as defined at the first Missing Believed Wiped event in 1993 (e.g. A For Andromeda) and those organizations dealing in cult television.
For my part, I have no "desired programmes" list, because I am grateful for any missing programmes that I am able to hand back to the archives.
Of course I would like to see such programmes back in the archive. But seekers cannot be choosers.
On another point.
Having seen more than my fair share (possibly) of television from the past, I am able to make assessments about the approach organizations had to broadcasting.
I will give an example.
I saw ITV for the first time on the first Saturday in November 1958.
The output was from ATV the Saturday/Sunday licence holder and it appeared to be very show business orientated. That Weekend it was Arthur Adair on Saturday and Norman Tozer on Sunday. They style was relaxed.
They broadcast from Foley Street in what looked like a 1950s " television hospitality room". Bric-a-brac on some shelving (a large brandy glass seem to feature on one of the shelves) could be seen in the background. The same studio was used for Shaw Taylor's 'Police Five'.
How it contrasted with Associated Rediffusion's approach, which, with the notable exception of Muriel Young's continuity announcing, was very bland. Only in the early evening were the continuity announcers seen, which included Redvers Kyle (he I believe joined Yorkshire Television in 1968) and Dick Norton.
The AR programmes tended to have a more serious style and drama along with documentaries were the main Company output (light entertainment programmes from AR included, "Double Your Money", "Take Your Pick", "Cool For Cats" and the admag, "Jim's Inn" . ATV had no in-view weatherman, but AR had Laurie West who seem to get the weather forecast wrong more often than right. Though the magnetic weather symbols were quite a revelation for that time.
I take it that this is the kind of recorded detail that all on this Forum would like to see.
Well, so would I, and it may be that someone out there, in that era, could have made home recordings using an 8mm cine camera (18 frames per second) with sound. You may ask was this possible? The answer is yes. The BBC engineering department did this 1955. They considered it was not good enough.
Two programmes based on this technique are in the archives. One was shown in 1998 at MBW, "Off the Record".
So, to recover such material, needless to say, is a desired aim.
Once again, seekers cannot be choosers. Yours,
|
|
|
Post by Andy Henderson on Sept 7, 2004 20:40:19 GMT
I have said in the past that I thought all archive television was worthy of the same consideration. It is, but my I think many people on here are confused by my contradictory attitude. So, I found old programmes, but do not seem to care about them?
Well there is an answer to this. And sadly a stark warning to enthusiasts. In the past, there have been quite a few well intended people who have attempted to return material (sometimes quite rare) and for various reasons they have been refused or ignored due to lack of interest. And sadly, it recently happened to me and I'm not going into the details.
Although things have got better, this area has always been open to abuse and very often the eager enthusiast or collector can come off worst and wonder why he or she bothered in the first place.
That is a feeling you can only have if you went to some effort to find something only to be rebuked with a throwaway sentence.
The bitter truth is that there is a legacy of attempted clubs, DVDs which fell through, films which were never returned and generally fed up people.
Then you can add to that the greed and hostility of some of the collectors. I have had to listen and negotiate in some very tricky situations. One of the worst recent examples was the shredding of some programmes in spite (pieces of which were then posted out to various people).
By all means shout and cast up words of hate on these organiations and their ignorant past. But also be aware I've spoken to many who have the same opinion and who lost their interest.
I haven't lost mine, but also be aware that we are still not that much further forward than you might think.
As Andrew is telling you with experience, words cannot bring these programmes back.
Andrew found a lovely A-R Admag special from Olympia, which (in my opinion) has more cultural and historic significance than many of the programmes usually mentioned on this forum. My reasoning is that it is unique. You will not be able to find anything else like it in the surviving output from that time. The enthuisiasm for that recording at MBW also indicates just how much it clicked with the audience.
|
|
|
Post by Gareth R on Sept 8, 2004 12:00:28 GMT
No, not ignoring the rights issues at all Well, yes, you are! You seem to be assuming that the BBC *could* have kept everything if it had wanted to, which is, obviously, an assumption that you cannot make.
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on Sept 8, 2004 14:48:25 GMT
Er, no actually! It could sure have kept a whole lot more than it did though, that's for sure! I was making the point earlier (before this thread oddly moved into philosophical and nostalgic reflections, for some reason) that a lot of stuff was of clear preservation status, even at the time - yet it still went! You can choose to argue that it wasn't if you like but there are just as many whol think differently. As far as avoiding things is concerned, I corrected Andy's comment that TOTP wasn't recorded in it's early days. But I have the paperwork that proves it was. This was not, I notice, touched upon again though. Where's this all going, by the way, G?
|
|
|
Post by H Hartley on Sept 8, 2004 15:41:40 GMT
was it Johnny Stewart 1960/70s producer of TOTPS who said he had made it his remit to keep at least 75% of a years output of TOTPS?
|
|
|
Post by William Martin on Sept 8, 2004 16:16:39 GMT
so what went wrong? was he overuled or just ignored.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Doherty on Sept 8, 2004 16:35:42 GMT
I did note that many people who owned a television set, in the early years, did not know wiping and junking was going on. One individual I spoke to was "livid" about licence money being thrown away. Quite right. So, what would Mr Piper and Mr Gareth R. do to put things right? By the way, the thread should be going in this direction. I said it before and I say it now. Be positive! Yours,
|
|
|
Post by Andy Henderson on Sept 8, 2004 17:22:44 GMT
"I was making the point earlier (before this thread oddly moved into philosophical and nostalgic reflections, for some reason) that a lot of stuff was of clear preservation status, even at the time - yet it still went! You can choose to argue that it wasn't if you like but there are just as many whol think differently"
The key word here is *think* as unless you have internal BBC documentation to prove that programme x was meant to be kept, but instead junked, your statements are just an educated guess.
Having spoken to some of the people who now work at the BBC and those who worked in that area (including many who wrote to '405 Alive'), it forms a picture of a film library which was kept (as far as indexing) as efficiently as any book library could be, but an Engineering Department who regarded videotapes as mainly a means to timeshift.
As Andrew said, this constant BBC bashing has gone on for years and we are no further forward. I got on with tracking down material years ago when I realised that philosophical theories are interesting, but don't deliver the goods.
If I had have sat back and done nothing, some fairly good programmes would undoubtebly have never seen the light of day again. The same goes for the efforts of Andrew and other unsung people who do not appear on this forum (Neil Ingoe, Simon Vaughan, Arthur Dungate, Andy Emmerson etc). Without them we would be short of a few episodes of 'Q', early Benny Hill, pre-war television extracts and films, the 1953 Robin Hood and much more).
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on Sept 9, 2004 6:53:53 GMT
I think you're mixing my comments up with some of the other posters though, Andy. With regard to the paperwork I mentioned, I was referring to the fact that Caversham P as Bs state that most TOTP were recorded (or pre-recorded) from '66 onwards. If you read back, you'll see what I said.
As far as paperwork proving that certain shows were meant to be kept or not, this was someone else's comment (above) relating to Johnnie Stewart, although you attributed my quote about P as Bs to this remark!
We've all spoken to BBC people over the years and it is possible to make what you call an educated guess about how things worked way back. As you say, the VT department was a separate operation but very much a law unto itself, with things being wiped on the whim of engineers (or taken home). Not a sensible or efficient way to run things at all (this applies to all TV companies though, not just the BBC - so it's not BBC bashing). It's not possible to say that archiving was an organised or efficient process back then though as a lot of programmes made on VT were simply not being taken into the equation as to whether they being considered for keeping or not. This fact comes through loud and clear from so many people who were there. As Andrew says above, many of us who watched TV back then simply did not know wiping was taking place at all for many, many years (I was one of them and was horrified when I finally learned of the fact; sure, we all hear the odd story about something going missing but, by and large, I never thought it included "prime programming"). He goes on: "one individual was livid about licence money being thrown away. Quite right". This is exactly my point and you have to understand how powerless people felt about the wholesale destruction of shows made with licence money. It was done without viewer knowledge. I have spoken to SO MANY TV buffs / collectors of one sort or another over the years (not just in the last few years) - going right back to the late '70s / early '80s who say exactly the same thing and feel resentment at the way it was all handled. Consequently many of them would definitely not bother with websites like this and anything rare they happen to uncover will most certainly be kept amongst themselves. It's a shame that they can't be taken on board as they may have treasures worth sharing - but who can blame them for feeling mightily pissed off that some of the shows they would have liked to see again are gone? I do too but my view is that there is a lot more out there to find; and if they are found, should be returned and shared!
We're all familiar with the names you mention that have uncovered missing material (any of us that have been into vintage TV for any length of time would be) - they are heroes as far as i'm concerned! We need more likre them!
|
|
|
Post by John G on Sept 9, 2004 8:56:33 GMT
People keep banging on about engineers and indifferent BBC staff wiping tapes. But how many tapes have been lost through plain old, old age and damage, do we know? A film will play whatever its condition, tapes are different, a small amount deteriation can render the whole tape useless. So stop blaming everybody about this ! you know age takes its toil on all of us.
|
|
|
Post by Gareth R on Sept 9, 2004 12:44:24 GMT
Where do I argue that it wasn't worth keeping, Laurence?
My point, and it's an important one, is that the rights agreements under which the BBC was labouring paid no respect whatsoever to the cultural importance of any given recording. It's oh-so-easy, 40 years later, to be able to point to a show and say "*That* should have been kept", but it's the BBC wasn't necessarily able to keep it even if wanted to.
Of course, many shows that *could* have been kept were junked, and that's a shame... but many people seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that the BBC had an automatic right to keep absolutely everything it made. I even know of people who are amazed to learn that the BBC doesn't have the automatic right to repeat or release anything in its archive. Ignorance about the rights/business side of television is still rife.
Then Andrew said...
I've found some missing episodes of an ATV series from the late 70s, and I've returned to the BBC a video recording of an edition of the early evening news from May 1976. All are domestic off-air recordings, but they're better than nowt!
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on Sept 9, 2004 15:37:24 GMT
They sure are! What was the ATV series incidentally?
Sure, rights hindered things but - bottom line - if there was the will to keep something, then there was a way (things were kept despite rights problems).
John: yes, old fashioned tape damage played it's part but more stuff was lost through deliberate acts than decay. Bit of a red herring really.
|
|
|
Post by William Martin on Sept 9, 2004 16:43:36 GMT
end of round 1 back to your corners.
|
|
|
Post by Andy Henderson on Sept 9, 2004 18:00:26 GMT
Yes, so in effect (as we all know) important programmes were archived and kept. All these phrases like 'deliberate junking' are exactly right because they were deliberate! The emphemeral was generally trashed, and that includes Doctor Who, TOTP and so on. If you showed re-showed the recently discovered episode on Xmas day this year at 7.30pm on BBC1 I could predict a great number of complaints and switch-offs. So, if you are a cult tv fan today - tough, in many cases the decisions which were made were perfectly reasonable.
But, if you are an academic needing to access (for example) an interview with Laurence Olivier or Carl Jung then these are there and still in perfect condition. The people who made these choices were not fools and accordingly there are a lot of excellent programmes in the BBC Archives. They were not pandering to the tastes of Pop music fans forty years later. There do not sem to be many cases of programmes meant to be kept which were junked, but many cases of programmes which were never meant to be kept - period.
The issue of what is worth having is an important one and the idea that everything could be kept is a dream. Every day, the amount of television held on tape increases. At some distant point we risk information overload. That doesn't apply to the 50s and 60s Television, but are we much better off for having every Episode of 'Coronation Street'?
Going back to the live TOTP and as I hope you are aware Laurence, I was specifically speaking about the early shows (first two years) which I understand were live and never recorded. Even if they were as Gareth pointed out, it was a time shift exercise, controlled by copyright.
|
|