Radio 4 this evening

[gillo]

I love Radio 4 with a passion; it's just as well, as I had to drive to Warwick, sit next to R as she drove to Dorridge, then drive home again - about an hour and a half in total. For the bits when I was alone the radio kept me company.

Comments

[brutti_ma_buoni]

I was once sick on the base of that statue, as a small bewildered child with food poisoning. (In the bad old days when the BM had a chippy instead of a nice restaurant. I'm sure this never happens nowadays.) I still feel bad about it. But the 100 Objects series is definitely too fascinating to miss. I've enjoyed the administrative/document things most, inevitably, but I'm also fascinated by the range of interviewees they have to support the objects. Really good radio.

I'm not going to comment on the torture/lies issue though. Too angry to be sensible.

[gillo]

I'm sure the BM is way too posh to allow children to throw up in the Egyptian section any more! And yes, the objects series is amazing from so many different perspectives. I slightly regret that they moved all the manuscripts and early printed books and so on over to the British Library, since it presumably means there won't be a First Folio or Authorised Version First Edition in the mix later on. (Actually, I regret it for more selfish reasons - the ol;d BM had far more of the real things on display, while the BL mostly has photocopies in its very small gallery space. I know it's better for the books, but...)

As for the torture thing, I'm there with you. How dare they act in our name in such ways?

[sammywol]

Heh! Yeah, it's not the same since they moved the books. The first time I was there they had a very, from an Irish perspective, funny exhibition on of 'Famous English Authors' Manuscripts' - note the 'English' - which was made up of W.B. Yeats, Sheridan, Swift, GBS and Oscar Wilde. I remember doing a quick count and there were a grand total of two MSS by actual English born authors (and one of those was an arguable - Congreve? can't recall).

It used to give me a great thrill going to the BM and waving my readers pass to go through the Sanctum Door. Ah well!

[gillo]

Especially since they seem to have replaced the books with more retail space. :-( I loved being able to see Jane Austen's cancelled chapter of
Persuasion and the Lindisfarne Gospels and the sheet of
Sir Thomas More that might just be in Shakespeare's handwriting. The BL doesn't offer such a good experience IMO. Once upon a time I dreamt of having a reader's pass to the Library. Now they seem to fill it with expensive exhibitions most of the time so you can't even see the beauty of the Reading Room.

[shapinglight]

I love Radio 4 too. Except for the plays. Mostly, they can keep 'em.

However, I'm not an Archers listener. Never got into it for some reason.

[gillo]

Mum used to listen to it at lunchtimes when I went home for lunch, so I got into the habit. There are great chunks I missed at various periods in my life, but I've always had a vague idea what is going on in Ambridge. And Phil Archer was pretty iconic.

[kathyh]

The "History of the World in a Hundred Objects" is wonderful isn't it. I've been getting it as a podcast and it's a really excellent listen while doing the ironing.

They didn't use the infamous theme tune (Dumty dum de dumty dum, dumty dum de dah dah), but lovely orchestral music (Vaughn Williams? Something like that) to play him out.

Ah, that's lovely. I haven't listened to it yet because I know I'm going to be rather stupidly upset.

[gillo]

Yes, the hundred objects are almost all superb bits of storytelling.

It's sad to see the passing of another generation of the family. I remember they killed off Dan on Lakey Hill; the music was appropriate for Phil. It's incredibly rare not to have the theme at the end; I'm glad they did that for him.

[lilachigh]

Oh poor Phil! My mother and hence me used to listen every evening without fail. I just about remember - if i squint hard - the night Grace died in the fire which was the night ITV started on TV!

Phil Archer was such a know it all kid, always arguing with his father and rather condescening to his big brother, Jack, who was an alcoholic, although it was never said in so many words. I never understood the nuances, being very young, but later on of course i did.

The torture issue is so difficult and so complicated. One of my teenage friends wanted to know if I could have stopped 9/11 by torturing someone, would i have done it? How do you answer that?

[chickenfeet2003]

One of my teenage friends wanted to know if I could have stopped 9/11 by torturing someone, would i have done it? How do you answer

Ask them whether it would be OK to torture a three year old girl because you believed the girl's father could give you the relevant information.

[steepholm]

Or, suggest they read Le Guins The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas.

[gillo]

They would probably accept the collateral damage. Grrr.

[steepholm]

So not the question. It's not "Is torture OK?" (I happen to believe it isn't, and that you can't rely on information gained that way, as people will say anything to stop the pain/fear.) The question is, "Is our government telling us the truth about torture?" Only one of them got that. That one was female. The others weren't. Hmm.

There were quite a few other variables in play too, though! For example, she was the only Iranian, in a room full of Brits. And, of the three men, one was a UKIP spokesman and another was Kelvin McKenzie, who don't constitute a representative sample - I hope...

I was sorry to miss Phil Archer's death - if that doesn't sound too ghoulish.

[gillo]

True - the men came across as fairly unpleasant, while she was as PC as you can get. I didn't listen to the rest of the programme as it annoyed me so much. I'm against torture for a lot of reasons, but the most relevant to them is that it just doesn't work - how can you believe what people say when they are driven desperate by fear?

You can always listen to the Omnibus tomorrow morning. Bet it will be on
Pick of the Week for that matter. And Listen Again.