Two months earlier, in Rome, she had gone to the Palatine Hill to write a letter beginning, “Seated upon a block of marble in the banquet hall of Cæsar,” and necessarily the picture suggested to the mind of her correspondent must have had Claire in the foreground with Cæsar somewhat remote.
Booth Tarkington - Claire Ambler (1928)
We see this all the time with contrived celebrity images. We see it in wildlife TV programmes where a famous presenter in the foreground is clearly the primary subject. The lions in the background are just a few more dusty old lions. We often see something similar with documentary TV programmes.
Meghan Markle does it by effectively placing herself in the royal foreground where the effect is the same. Gone, done with, no longer relevant – so just look at me.
7 comments:
I wonder if it is a generational thing? I can remember when documentaries were about the science, the natural world, history, or the sports event itself.
Now it seems that people do not want knowledge unless there is delivery accompanied by the comfort of an approved celebrity. Music no longer entrances unless there is a dance video to accompany it.
And yet... I remember Jack Hargreaves in his Out of Town series. I used to dislike the laid back nature of his delivery, but now I appreciate the series. Perhaps the difference is that he appeared to know his stuff rather than worrying about his appearance?
DJ - I've watched one or two Jack Hargreaves programmes on YouTube and yes, he knew his stuff. Now it almost seems anomalous that someone with a considerable depth of knowledge would appear on TV. Maybe those who enjoy listening to knowledgeable people have drifted away from TV, so the programmes have changed accordingly.
"Maybe those who enjoy listening to knowledgeable people have drifted away from TV"
I really could not say ... I ditched my tele in the 90s.
James - and you haven't missed a thing. Almost all of it is ads and trash.
The Megan wars seem based on the difference between a culture where royalty is valued for its own sake, and where it is "royalty", a film set idea that gives an old-world glow of quality and wealth to whoever invokes it. The issue of how racists treated them so badly and are not in touch with their emotions seems designed to make royalty appear like a setting that was just too tawdry and faded to contain the sparkling couple.
Who was the aristocratic lady who took us televisually, to, around and inside historic and unusual buildings. She was great.
As was Fyffe Robertson and his wonderful film and sound man. Of course the system put a stop to that. He had never been a Blue Peter presenter.And only one support man instead of a team of ten of fifteen.
Sam - and yet the sparkling couple only have that one film idea and if they aren't really part of the cast then they are done. It feels as if it could turn into a more obvious miscalculation as age and lack of originality creep up on their sparkle. Ironically, that could be worth watching - almost.
Doonhamer - ah, Fyffe Robertson - there's a name from the past. Kenneth Clark was good too, and I'm sure he was never a Blue Peter presenter.
Post a Comment