On 2013-04-13 22:38:55 +0100, Jake said:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 19:40:03 +0100, Sacha wrote:



I think we must be also be aware that MD doesn't direct the programmes,
the camera angles, or the scripting. I can find some things to
complain about but to be absolutely fair, the structure of a programme
is NOT his responsibility. On Twitter, just today, I have asked him to
see if he can persuade directors to put the names of plants onscreen
because I found it very frustrating not to see that last night. His
replies are courteous and indicate this is not within his power! Like
all of all those who front programmes that exasperate us at times, he
isn't actually the backstop but equally, like all those others, the
face on the screen gets a hard time of it.

This does add weight to the suggestions that Toby Buckland et al were
the scapegoats for the failed revamp of GW prior to Monty's return.

Conversely I suspect that MD has a bit more influence over things than
Sacha's post suggests. Take, for example, his clear statement in the
last series that squishing lily beetle was the ONLY way to dispose of
them. His adherence to the tenets of the Soil Association means that
an opportunity to educate about the proper use of pesticides has been
lost. (FWIW Provado Ultimate Bug Killer, which is a "chemical"
response to lily beetle, uses a "new generation" neonicotinoid which
is not on the EU's hit list and has not been withdrawn from sale by
the main chains, but is nevertheless lethal to bees if not used
properly.) To say that squishing is the only way was, de facto, a lie.
He sustained that approach in print and it must therefore follow that
his arguments - which were not truthful - prevailed over an editorial
team responsible for a supposedly factual TV programme.

Hence I no longer watch GW and will not until someone announces that
MD is no longer presenting it and we no longer have to endure little
more than a tweak round the edges at his place and only then in the
way that he gardens.

Geoff Hamilton introduced me to coir instead of peat years ago by
explaining. MD simply put me off organic gardening by pontificating. I
will be eternally grateful that my formative gardening years were
not, in any way, influenced by MD!

Cheers, Jake
=======================================
Urgling from the East end of Swansea Bay where the
showers of April have arrived!

Obviously - as we all know - MD laid down certain conditions re
programme content and location before he agreed to do the job. He was
taken on to do it after he'd taken that stance, so the choice was that
of the programme's makers. Whether one agrees or not, he decided to
stick to his principles and that at least, is admirable. I personally,
think it wrong not to tell people that there are alternatives to
organic methods, even if he prefaced his remarks with "personally, I
wouldn't use this but....", simply because this is a programme to
broaden peoples' knowledge and views of gardening. As far as the rest
of making the programme goes, if he were the director, it would be fair
to level a lot more criticism at him but he isn't so there it is. We
watched the programme on Friday because it promised to be a lot more
interesting and to us, it was. One thing he did say on Twitter in
response to someone else is that people watching are seeing what
appears a seamless flow from one subject or shot to the next but in
fact, he is not just wandering around the garden with someone using a
shouldercam. He said that each shot can take an hour to set up and
nearly that much again to complete, so time constraints are
considerable. This may not alter your view of the programme content
but it's a good point that he made and one to bear in mind, imo.
Nobody but the director makes the final decision as to what shots will
be taken, there will be some scripting and in the end, some editing. MD
is not responsible alone for the finished programme, nor was Geoff
Hamilton, Toby Buckland or Percy Thrower or Chris Beardshaw. I do
realise that Geoff H was the patron saint of gardening but at the same
time, you'd never get new, young gardeners starting now to watch those
programmes with real interest. It's a shame because they're full of
'meat' but times have moved on in terms of expectation and an
entertainment element is now expected, as well.
--

Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon
www.helpforheroes.org.uk

In article ,
lid says...


Well, if the editor isn't a gardener, or takes advice on the editing from someone who is, then it's inevitable that
the gems are sometimes going to fall by the wayside leaving us with not enough information to make the clip
worth showing in the first place. And that leads to a poor programme and people turning away from it. We could
have learned twice as much about Cimbidiums for the want of a short sentence.

The sooner it dawns on the general populace that where TV film and
radio are concerned they can't and should not believe "the evidence of
their own eyes and ears".... the better.

Sound and visual Media are DESIGNED to convince/delude the audience
they are real life witnesses.

Janet

In article ,
Sacha wrote:

... I do realise that Geoff Hamilton was the patron saint of gardening...

Ah, what a glowingly fitting way to put it!
I was going to wax lyrical about the Golden Age of GW, when Jake
mentioned [Saint] Geoff, but you've put it in a nutshell Sacha! He
bestrides the history of the programme like a colossus.

John