Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 16:37:11 -0700

From: Cortus <hardycor@owl.csusm.edu>

Subject: Hardy On BBC

 

Dear All,

Robert Goddard has asked me to forward to you the news of a forthcoming BBC TV programme on Hardy, called "Homeground - Dead Man Talking." It is being broadcast on August 13, at 19:30, on BBC2. Further information can be found here:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/homeground/comingup.shtml

 

Thank you Robert,

Betty

---

From: "patmann" <patmann@ouvip.com>

Subject: Re: Hardy On BBC

Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 08:02:07 +0100

 

Thank you so much for that info! I've highlighted the programme in my 'Radio Times' magazine.

Patricia

---

From: "Richard Nemesvari" <rnemesva@stfx.ca>

Subject: Re: Hardy On BBC

Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 11:00:24 -0300

 

I went to the site Betty provided below, and found the comments describing the programme quite interesting. It promises to show how "an outwardly genteel Victorian writer came to understand the passions of a rougher age," and further claims that "Homeground goes behind the books and meets the real Thomas Hardy."

 

So let's, as a colleague of mine is found of saying, "unpack" these statements by interrogating them. If Hardy was "an outwardly genteel Victorian," does that imply that "inwardly" he was not actually genteel? Is supposed "gentility" a significant element of Hardy's character in the public perception, or is this a standard cliche about Victorians in general? What precise "passions" are meant, and what "rougher age" is being evoked? The early nineteenth century? The eighteenth century? To describe something as an "age," or even an "earlier age," is, to say the least, imprecise. And couldn't one describe certain elements of the Victorian period as more than a little "rough" themselves?

 

Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 12:45:14 -0600

Subject: Hardy on BBC

From: Joan Sheski <harrys@cnetco.com>

 

Richard Nemesvari's comments are quite on target. Prior to the BBC

promotion, I assumed literary scholars to be the ones who "go behind the books", or rather, deeply into the texts. I find it curious that with Hardy's prose, so strongly image-based and layered thereby with so many meanings, anyone might assume the transmission of those meanings through images alone. Richard's "cultural construction" paragraph points to this issue.

 

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 12:24:57 -0400

From: Rosemarie Morgan <rosemarie.morgan@yale.edu>

Subject: Re: MC on Arts and Entertainment

Hi East Coasters--

 

And while I'm here, Bravo to Richard Nemesvari. I've just read the British Times' clip headlined "Hardy the Copycat of Casterbridge" and it's disgustingly cheap -- tabloid stuff. Evidently modern journalists remain ignorant of the fact that writers over the ages have turned to alternative literary & cultural sources for their artwork-- notably Shakespeare (sorry-- I know I've said this before, but it's a good example) in culling Plutarch. Moreover, if Hardy had been in fact the (implied) plagiarist who was "desperate" to have his Facts Notebook destroyed for fear of being caught borrowing he had plenty of time in which to get un-desperate. It's not as if he was snuffed mid-life. He had more time than most to sort his papers during his last years.

 

Seems the British media still experience problems with the self-made man -- or what Napoleon better termed the "Career of the Talents."

 

Cheers.

Rosemarie

---

From: "patmann" <patmann@ouvip.com>

Subject: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:34:24 +0100

 

Oh Dear! The dear old BBC strikes again! Have just settled down to watch and record the 'Dead Man Talking' programme on BBC2 only to find that they, in their 'wisdom', have decided to show a football match instead. If anyone knows when the programme is now scheduled to be shown I would dearly like to know. Patricia Mann

---

From: "K Eldron" <kaffi@onetel.net.uk>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:45:17 +0100

 

My eyes are old and in the current British heatwave my concentration often falters, but am I alone in having found tonight s Hardy programme on BBC2 something of a letdown? It has, of course, long been known that TH took up soccer on a semi-professional basis in his old age - not, as was originally supposed, out of necessity when he lost his pension fund through injudicious investments in wool futures on the Little Hintock livestock exchange, but at the urging of younger contemporaries such as Graves, Lawrence and Virginia Woolf who were keen to reassert the noble proletarian game as the true sport of the English literati in the face of Sir John Squire and the Georgians elevation of that insipid bourgeois preoccupation, cricket ? and there was certainly something deeply affecting about the glimpses the programme gave us of the GOM s tremulous stay in goal for Casterbridge Athletic. One can even forgive the BBC s feeling it needed to colorize these newly-discovered, miraculously-preserved home movies for a modern audience, but ? and herein lies my disappointment ? what a sorry lack of attention to detail here manifested itself! True, the opposing team was clearly shown in the authentic Sherton Abbas FC away strip (suggesting that this was almost certainly the final of the 1926 Henchard Cup); but Casterbridge was equally clearly shown in the colours of Chelsea! - a metropolitan club which to the best of my knowledge never played in the Wessex League, and for which there are no recorded appearances by TH. A silly slip that spoiled the programme. Unless, unless...could this have been film of the inter-league FA Cup, in which case Sherton and Chelsea might have shared the same pitch? But in that case what was TH doing in the London side? Maybe somewhere there is a lost notebook that reveals that he was smuggled into the London side under a false name ("Albert Camus" springs to mind), perhaps to subvert the bohemians on their homeground (sic). Now what a fascinating programme that would make! Regards, a disappointed K Eldron

kaffi@onetel.net.uk

---

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:54:02 -0400

From: Rosemarie Morgan <rosemarie.morgan@yale.edu>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

 

I'm sure Hardy would have enjoyed this Monty-Python-esque sketch. --a real chuckle. Tonight, --K.Eldron-- I've been emailed 4 different accounts (from the UK) of the BBC's soccer hubris and yours, on the Forum, was decidedly the most entertaining.

 

I also commiserate with Michael Barry for having the latest film of the *Mayor of Casterbridge* networked on A&E before it appears on British TV. I can only suggest, by way of mitigation of circumstance, that the corruption of Mayors is a staple in the US.

 

Cheers,

Rosemarie

---

From: "Gary Alderson" <Gary.Alderson@btinternet.com>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 19:56:18 +0100

 

The good, honest, native English stock being replaced by more successful foreign imports using modern techniques? Were you watching Chelsea or the Mayor of Casterbridge?

---

From: "Michael Barry" <michaelj.barry@talk21.com>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:05:04 +0100

 

Me too! I was out and recorded 2 half hour programmes, which both turned into football!! Speechless - presumably some wisenheimer at work trying to dumb us all down! Michael

---

From: "Patrick Roper" <patrick@prassociates.co.uk>

Subject: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 12:12:04 +0100

 

I am not sure if my earlier e-mail worked, so here goes again. The above BBC2 TV programme which was cancelled in favour of a football match a couple of weeks ago will be shown on Wednesday 20 August at 7.30 pm British Summer Time.

 

Deatils are here:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/homeground/

 

Patrick Roper

---

From: Thudecki@cs.com

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:31:42 EDT

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

 

Does anyone know if this program will be airing in the US and if so when?

Thanks, Janine

---

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 00:16:35 -0400

From: Rosemarie Morgan <rosemarie.morgan@yale.edu>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

 

I doubt it, Janine-- it's a BBC broadcast and from the sound of it isn't worth tuppence! But I'm sure someone will record it for you if needs be-- (Patrick Roper, dare I say it, is a possible "someone," -- always so generously ready to help-- also Michael Barry--both on the Forum mail list)

Forgive me Patrick and Michael if I presume . . (you can have my tuppence .

. . .)

 

RM

 

PS

 

Poof! Silly me: the Beeb will probably have a recorded copy -- write to

them.

---

From: Thudecki@cs.com

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 00:29:33 EDT

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

 

RM, Thanks I will keep it in mind but probably it will be aired here someday or probably not if it is not worth a tuppence! I did enjoy the Mayor production on A&E. Now I can give my two cents and say it was worthwhile viewing although I have not completed the book to compare. I did think the acting superb and of the same opinion of you that Farefrae was quite "dishy"! Hope A&E presents similiar productions in the near future and uses the actor who played Farefrae, especially. Other than this, I agree with mostly all comments on the show. Definitely worth viewing!

Have a great week everyone! Janine

---

From: "Michael Barry" <michaelj.barry@talk21.com>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 03:07:13 +0100

 

In theory we've (UK) got it national tonight - though my TV mag doesn't identify it. I will record it - but it'll be on PAL format, and US are NTSC. Anyway janine - let me know if you're desperate. I missed 80% of it last time, as recorder was in pieces and meal arrangements were outside my control! I'll let you know if it looks like more than tuppence! Michael Barry PS Who is this "dishy" actor playing Farfrae (presumably not Ciaran Hinds who was "dour"!).

---

 

From: Thudecki@cs.com

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:23:13 EDT

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Michael,

Thanks for the offer to tape the show. RM said someone would come to my rescue. Good idea to let me know if it is worth watching. I will check our broadcasting - perhaps it is on later tonight.

Hmm, I am not sure who the actor was playing Farfrae, but he became more appealing as the show progressed. Maybe only the woman would agree. Webster's online defines "dour" as 1 : STERN, HARSH 2 : OBSTINATE, UNYIELDING 3 : GLOOMY, SULLEN

Farfrae seemed to be having a good time throughout much of the movie

- sporting his kilts, dancing and entertaining woman, not at all "dour" to me. On the other hand Michael was dour in most of the movie, don't you think? Perhaps the contrast of the two characters is what you meant, Michael...I was not sure.

Concerning Ciaran, see link <A HREF="http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hc&cf=gen&id=1800023851">Yahoo! Movies: Ciaran Hinds - Main Page</A>. Interesting that in this article I just dug up online it is stated "A towering, burly man whose jagged features make him a natural for playing strong, silent types, Hinds has won respect and recognition from critics and drooling women alike". Some have mentioned in the group that he would hardly seem lthe type man woman would fight over. Ofcourse, I understand it to be true of him portraying Micheal Henchard. Personally I still found him attractive in some way - hard to explain, but don't put me in the drooling woman category!

I have a question for all about the ending of the book and ending in the telecast. I wondered after absorbing those final words after days of thought - how would Micheal's last dying words be described - could they be called bitter, hopeless, vinticative, depressed, etc? Certainly something to think about and maybe to discuss.

From: "K Eldron" <kaffi@onetel.net.uk>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 16:19:07 +0100

 

I'm sure I'm not the only member of the Hardy list grateful to Patrick Roper for alerting us to last night's rescheduled showing of "Dead Man Talking" - had I relied on the Radio Times I would have missed it. This was, alas, another example of the BBC's incompetent - or "so what?" - approach to scheduling, guaranteed to disappoint many of those who would have liked to have seen the programme but won't have known it was on while simultaneously infuriating the legion of Brian Blessed/railway enthusiasts who set their VCRs to record the advertised programme about 150 years of steam locomotion in Doncaster (railway enthusiasts always watch their programmes on video so that they can use the freeze-frame to home in on crucial details of their favourite old boiler. Come to think of it, so probably do Brian Blessed enthusiasts). Having said that I found Dead Man Talking very clunky. It reminded me of an episode of Prince Edward's "Crown & Country" series - shot on a shoestring with local amateur actors. I'm not saying it was or they were, but that was the effect. I think the problem was that the producers found that a "book of facts" wasn't really visual enough to be the basis for a 30 minute television programme, so it had to be padded out with reconstructions, dreamy panoramas of Dorset, etc. Still, it was worth it for the glimpses of the meticulously kept notebook itself were fascinating (not least because it wasn't physically exactly what springs to mind when you hear the word "notebook") and for the wonderful personal reminiscence of a very much nicer TH than emerged from the rest of the programme.

K Eldron

kaffi@onetel.net.uk

---

Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 13:04:32 -0400

From: Rosemarie Morgan <rosemarie.morgan@yale.edu>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

 

Okay-- okay --Here's my "tuppence.."

 

Cheers.

R

 

... and for the wonderful personal reminiscence of a very much nicer

>TH than emerged from the rest of the programme.

>K Eldron

>kaffi@onetel.net.uk

---

From: "Michael Barry" <michaelj.barry@talk21.com>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 00:36:57 +0100

I'm glad someone else is coming to your rescue over this doc, Janine - irony to the fore here: while I was busy sorting out my day's e-mails (inc offering you a copy of the doc), I lost touch with the time, and once again missed half of the programme! The latter half, which I caught, seemed to be saying Hardy relied on real life for his stories, he copied out entries in newspapers into his diaries, and transmuted them into his novels (hence the earlier ref to Shakespeare and Plutarch - or do I mean Holinshed?!). The argument ran that this drawing on real life took TH's novels further away from the audience-acceptable conventions of literature (and more into the realms of sordid reality), until at last with Jude, there was such an outcry that Hardy gave up writing novels, and Emma moved into her own room at the far end of the house. All this being proven by the existence of a number of notebooks that TH wanted destroyed but his executors let him down, presumably having an eye to the main chance! I have a feeling this is all old hat to the academics in the Association and that this is why it might not be worth "tuppence" (I'm not even going to try and convert it into cents!). As a non-academic with all too little knowledge of TH, I found it interesting as it formalized an overall trend in his writing that I didn't previously know enough about to put into words, and the programme was nicely done from a visual POV with some low-key but well-designed background dramatisations, which appealed to my own professional interests (how many times have you seen Hardy on a bicycle??). My references to the Mayor of C were repetitions of previous comments - as the Big Issue with us here in Blighty is that the Blighters who plan our viewing sent it to the US of A first and we're still being denied a peak at it! I'm especially interested as I appear very briefly in it - and would have had a scene with Ciaran Hinds (a stall-owner at the bottom left of a small street in Lacock) only traffic conditions made my epic journey so long that I had to be replaced!! We await the autumnal transmission schedule patiently!

Best wishes

Michael B

Best wishes

---

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 15:45:52 -0400

From: Keith Wilson <kgwilson@uottawa.ca>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

At the risk of committing the cardinal error of commenting on something I haven't seen, namely the BBC programme on the publishing of the Hardy "Facts" notebook, I have been astonished by the form this sudden flurry of media interest has taken. Nothing has been discovered, nothing has changed, nothing is new. Hardy scholars have been consulting this notebook in the Dorset County Museum for many, many years: its existence and contents have long been known. Admittedly, few if any readers of the notebook came to the odd conclusion that the fact that Hardy took note of quirky newspaper-recorded events, some of which he subsequently used as plot devices, was evidence that he had committed anything remotely resembling plagiarism, which is, I gather, the sub-text of some of the least temperate of recent media comments. When Lennart Bjork edited the Literary Notebooks, or Richard Taylor the Personal Notebooks, or Millgate and Dalziel the "Studies, Specimens, &c" notebook, I don't remember the BBC or the Times getting unduly excited. All that has happened is that "Facts" is now joining these other formerly unpublished materials in published form -- certainly a long-delayed event that we should all welcome but hardly the stuff of radical revisionism, or any reason for the media to get unduly excited.

 

What next? -- another floating as hot-off-the-press novelty of the hoary old legend about the cat and the heart?

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 17:55:34 -0400

From: Rosemarie Morgan <rosemarie.morgan@yale.edu>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

 

Well said, Keith.

 

I understood, from reading the BBC account that the "thrill" is generated largely by the *Facts* editor, Greenslade, who has, if the "account" is to be believed, laid stress on the murky secrecy of this document and Hardy's attempts to conceal its contents -- wishing it destroyed. Apart from the sensationalism aspect of the whole business (cheap and nasty, hence not worth "tuppence" in my view), Hardy had nearly 30 years in which to destroy *Facts* had he felt so desperately embarrassed by them (I know I've said this before -- the silliness is obviously getting to me).

 

I know you are one of many scholars who has long since examined the *Facts* at first hand. But of course, had Hardy lovers done *their* homework they wouldn't now have the "thrill" off encountering the "Real Hardy" (as the account puts it) -- that is, The Man Who Stole Such Things.

 

Needless to say the old bard will survive all this belittlement of his art. He survived Leavis, after all.

Cheers,

Rosemarie

---

From: Thudecki@cs.com

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 20:56:02 EDT

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

 

Michael,

I am sorry you missed half the program again. I think

you need an alarm clock installed on your TV. Absolutely the artistic temperment, probably distracted like I often am. Thank you for enlightening me with your impressions of the doc, at least what you did see of it. It seems that it may be aired first there in Great Britain, but hopefully later (perhaps) in USA. Hope they repeat it again for your benefit. I certainly would be pleased to view it myself. I am sure I could extract something of value from the doc, even though members still content it is not worth a tuppence. Sorting the true from the contrived is always a challenge. It may be trite in content but perhaps of worth, exhibiting other merits such as visual or artistic expression. The history can always be debated. Is there any history that cannot? Bye the way, I have only seem one picture of TH on a bicycle in a book which I happened to recently acquire. I would enjoy the reenactment of these images and others very much, appealing to my artistic taste. It is good to hear that the scenes were nicely done. I am not sure what you mean by someone coming to my rescue over the doc....did you mean all the reviews coming in? Interesting that you were in the A&E film M of C. Let us know the scene you appear in and we will look for you should it be televised again. I thought that it had in both countries last week. It is being shown here a number of times - someone in the group pointed that out. I suppose having heard all the debates on the ending, you are anxious to view it even more. Hinds' acting was wonderful in my opinion. He fit the part well with superb character in his strong features and tall build. I enjoyed the production emensely. Good casting!

My best, Janine

---

From: "Michael Barry" <michaelj.barry@talk21.com>

Subject: Re: Homeground - Dead Man Talking

Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 04:35:19 +0100

 

Interesting Keith - I'd missed the plagiarism

accusation on my interrupted viewing - which would indeed be very far-fetched!

Plagiarism I've always considered is the flip side of copyright - one leading to

infringing the other (where applicable) - and requiring a direct and, I think,

unacknowledged quotation. Source material is a different matter

altogether.

And anyway - I was trained early in the lovely

saying "plagiarism - or if you take from more than source, research...."!

Michael Barry

---