|
|
Post by nickconnor1961 on Feb 5, 2011 20:38:34 GMT
Currentley watching a programme about Bob monkhouse, and it appears his Daughter is sitting on a goldmine of archive material,
big Question is, will she make it avaiable to us, make a fortune by the sounds of it, very rare Audio recordings of Hancock, would be very Lucritive, i would have thought
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe Haynes on Feb 6, 2011 8:58:18 GMT
She has made it available. Search theese boards and you will find a few threads.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard Bignell on Feb 6, 2011 10:05:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Feb 6, 2011 13:05:13 GMT
Bob had every intention of donating it for public use IIRC , however when he died his wife apparently was not very happy with the attitude from an approach by the BFI and kept it under lock and key. When she died suddenly his daughter found the Kaleidescope org a far better liason to getting it back
into the public archives.AFAIK
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert Belford on Feb 6, 2011 21:39:39 GMT
What exactly was the attitude of the BFI?
|
|
|
|
Post by Philip Hindley on Feb 7, 2011 15:27:21 GMT
Just watched the SECRET LIFE OF BOB MONKHOUSE what a fabulous programme,I always liked Bob,but this made me really warm to him. I would have loved to have met the guy in his vast treasure trove I bet he could have talked for hours about tv and films ; I know he loved comedy and all that but I wonder if he recorded anything like Quatermass ? I know it probably would've come to light by now, but thought I'd ask.Also,what was that beautiful piece of piano music used at the close of the programme, it was so poignant, it brought a tear to my eye.
|
|
|
|
Post by cperry on Feb 7, 2011 18:26:34 GMT
His collection is listed in the book Philip.
c
|
|
|
|
Post by adriane17 on Feb 7, 2011 19:09:13 GMT
The book is excellent - and I say that as someone with no connection to Kaleidescope indeed I don't know anyone involved with that fine organisation at all.
It was great to get the chance to see the Monkhouse programme on Saturday. Very interesting indeed. Whoever picked the soundtrack was cool - "Speed Of Life" and Neu! Blimey!
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Feb 7, 2011 19:11:17 GMT
His collection is listed in the book Philip. Yes. Philip was asking what music was used on the end of the doc, not what was found in his collection. Regardless, we should really have the 2010? discoveries list updated to reflect the collection. I'll see if I can identify the music. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Feb 7, 2011 22:06:12 GMT
His collection is listed in the book Philip. Yes. Philip was asking what music was used on the end of the doc, not what was found in his collection. Regardless, we should really have the 2010? discoveries list updated to reflect the collection. I'll see if I can identify the music. I think Chris was addressing the Quatermass aspect of Philip's question, Paul. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Feb 8, 2011 0:09:56 GMT
I think Chris was addressing the Quatermass aspect of Philip's question, Paul. Really? Not clearly. Regardless, we should put the Monkhouse collection on the site somewhere where it can be publicly accessible and then we can point people in that direction. Paul |
|
|
|
Post by cperry on Feb 8, 2011 7:32:23 GMT
There is a publicly accessible book that people can buy Paul, which lists the wider collection we hold, and that helps to raise funds for the storage of the large collection.
Plus all the important 'missing' discoveries are on the Raiders of the Lost Archives lists that have been published by us in the last three years and are available to read on here.
Sorry my post wasn't clearer.
c
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Feb 8, 2011 9:46:00 GMT
There is a publicly accessible book that people can buy Paul, which lists the wider collection we hold, and that helps to raise funds for the storage of the large collection. Plus all the important 'missing' discoveries are on the Raiders of the Lost Archives lists that have been published by us in the last three years and are available to read on here. The problem is that a lot of people aren't going to buy the book. In an online world people reasonably expect to be able to look at a page online in reference to a single collection such as this and this site is the obvious home for such a page. I've done a 'Monkhouse Collection' search of the forum and came up with 10 rather dense threads, so perhaps we need to have locked non discussion threads per find detailing a group discovery such as this? It makes sense to me. In that way, anyone wishing to get a picture of the eclectic nature of a single and in this case large personal collection (albeit of technically poor quality) can make their own judgement of it's cultural quality. Paul |
|
|
|
Post by Robert Belford on Feb 8, 2011 10:08:54 GMT
www.kaleidoscopepublishing.co.uk/books-bobsfullhouse.htmlThat page doesn't display properly in Firefox there is text on top of other text. Unfortunately in this digital age a lot of people expect everything to be available online for free. I have no idea what the situation is behind the scenes - whether the aim is to earn a living or fund future research, or both - but the amount of work that has gone into researching and putting together the 408-page book is obvious from the sample pages available online. Just laying out 408 pages and formatting the photographs would take at least several weeks work for one person I bet? That's leaving out any research or writing. Maybe the question is: how much would it hit sales of the book if the listings were fully available online? My guess is quite a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by cperry on Feb 8, 2011 12:08:15 GMT
Well Paul, we will have to disagree.
If, and I say if, Kal was going to put information up in a single place as an online catalogue we would put it on our webspace, and not use someone elses. This forum is a leisure place for me to come to lol.
I don't think it unreasonable for us to retain some information privately if it helps us to raise funds to keep intact what is a large collection to store.
I also note your point about poor technical quality - some of it is poor, some of it is on 35mm and 16mm film and is very good quality.
If I may raise a parallel situation with you, I wouldn't ask you - and don't expect you - to put up comparable information from projects you may work on, such as listing the Ed Doolan collection or all the Pebble Mills you rescued when Pebble Mill closed at the Mailbox, because I know that much of that information is sensitive information and the BBC or Ed may not want it online for reading. Likewise, the Bob Monkhouse book was written so a cut of proceeds goes to Prostate Cancer research and the rest helps support the storage of the collection. That is the agreement with the Bob Monkhouse family and it seems reasonable to me.
May I also add that it took many months to research, so it seems reasonable that it isn't a free resource. The people who compile Sift, Infax or ITN Source are paid to do the job, but we do not get any pay for what we do.
Can I further add that Bob's collection is not the only large collection of this type that has been recovered in the last 20 years, but I don't see many other archives hosting free lists of it on Missing Episodes. Perhaps if the BFI or BBC want to start listing collections like the Peter Sellers collection on here, then we might consider joining the section? Collections such as Eric Morecambe's have been explored but details aren't posted anywhere. Why should we be the exception and give away our livelihoods? And it is our bread and butter livelihood that pays for everything else.
Kal has always supported the principle of freedom of information - and over the years we have contributed to many threads, events and books, often for no money. But we do have to make some money to pay the bills so we can't offer too much online for free. I'm sorry about that.
c
|
|
