I have on several occasions written to the Director of Programmes for the B.B.C. regarding the plays produced by the B.B.C. and have usually received a printed post card in acknowledgment of my letters. I am appalled by the programmes usually sent out between five and six o’clock on B.B.C. Television. These nearly always seem to include fights and shootings. One of the worst recently was a prolonged fight between two men in front of a cage in which a lion was pacing behind bars watching the combat. About two days ago there was an episode in which a man struck a woman in the face. These sort [sic] of exhibitions must surely encourage violence, and I think a great deal of the violent crime which is a growing menace to our society is due to them.
I think very careful consideration should be given to the selection of men responsible for the production of T.V. programmes most of which are insufferingly [sic] boring to me and of which the spoken word is usually in an unintelligible American drawl.
Yours very truly
E.W.M.
D.Sc. F.C.G.I. Hon. M.I.E.E.
Minsterley, Nr. Shrewsbury Salop
8 Jan 1963
To: The Director General of the B.B.C.
Dear Sir,
I have often watched with enjoyment the entertaining television programmes put out by your Corporation in which people like [cowboy star] Bronco Lane knock out their opponent with a hearty uppercut or a gangster stuns the detective with a sharp blow on the head with a revolver butt. The victim though is usually seen to rise within seconds and shake his head and carry on regardless.
I find, with concern, that children in this school believe that such blows to the head can be delivered with very little effect, whereas, of course, concussion, blindness, deafness or paralysis would be the most likely consequence in real life if death were escaped.
In view of the marvellous work you do in the cause of education I feel it would be reasonable to expect that this important aspect be stated by an announcer in children’s viewing time, say perhaps 3 or 4 times a year.
Yours faithfully,
S.D.J.
Headmaster
CHAPTER TWO
THE ROYAL FAMILY
As can be seen from the appendix at the end of this book, the 1969 fly-on-the-wall documentary about the Royal Family was the second most popular programme on television in the 1960s. In an era of intense rivalry between the BBC and the ITV companies, when it was impossible to persuade the two to cooperate on the televising of major sporting occasions like the FA Cup Final so that viewers got the same event on both channels at the same time, it was a tribute to the uniqueness of the occasion that the Royal Family film went out first on BBC, since the BBC had made the programme, and was then repeated on ITV.
The Duke of Edinburgh had for many years wanted to modernise the institution of which he was a part. In 1968 Lord Mountbatten’s son-in-law, the film producer Lord Brabourne, felt the Royal Family would benefit if it was seen by the public as being more modern and informal. This view was shared by the Queen’s Australian press secretary, William Heseltine, and enthusiastically endorsed by Prince Philip. Brabourne suggested to him that a documentary should be made about the Royal Family’s private life, recommending that Richard Cawston, then head of the BBC’s documentary department, should direct the film. The time seemed auspicious as 1969 was the year of Prince Charles’s investiture as Prince of Wales.
The Queen, had considerable reservations which were shared by both her daughter and her mother. Against the strong advice of the Queen Mother, however, the Queen was convinced by her husband and his uncle, Lord Mountbatten. She gave Cawston full access to Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, Sandringham and Balmoral for more than a year, shooting 43 hours of raw footage of the Queen’s private and official life.
The result was a truly sensational 105-minute film which was avidly watched all over the world. Viewers were astonished to see the Queen in a headscarf driving the four-year-old Prince Edward to the village shop to buy sweets, astounded to see Prince Philip grilling sausages for a family picnic beside a Scottish loch and delighted to see Prince Charles snapping the A string of his cello against the cheek of his younger brother, Edward. It made them seem so homely, so ordinary, so … well, just like us. The film was a global media event at a time when there were very few of them, yet by the end of the year of that first transmission, the Queen had come to appreciate the wisdom of her mother’s initial advice and withdrew it from circulation. Apart from a short clip on YouTube which is repeated on various television documentaries, the film has not been seen in its entirety since 1969.
The Victorian constitutional historian Walter Bagehot had once famously counselled on the subject of monarchical mystique: ‘We must not let in the daylight upon magic.’ The 1969 film, despite its unanimously ecstatic reception, did exactly that and the Royal Family changed from a distantly waving symbol of British History into a family who were indeed just like us.
Perhaps unsurprisingly then, the selection of letters that follows there is a discernible pattern of increasing dissatisfaction with the monarchy and with its portrayal on television. There is nothing but rapture for the televising of the coronation in 1953 but, despite the widespread acclaim for Cawston’s film, there is already a sense that the Royal Family were not entirely the same as imagination had previously made them. Perhaps being ‘just like us’, once the astonishment wore off, was not what their subjects wanted them to be.
It may also be that the work of the satirists had prepared the country for an alternative view of the Queen and her family. That Was the Week That Was lined up the monarchy as one of its constant targets as it also trained its weapons on the Macmillan government, the Church, Parliament and other institutions of state. The letters that poured into the BBC were invariably those of protest that the BBC, so long a part of the Establishment, should now take the side of those who wished to insult the monarchy. TW3’s successor, Not So Much a Programme, More a Way of Life, transmitted a sketch about the Duke of Windsor shortly after the death had been announced of his sister, the then Princess Royal, which drew a very large volume of complaints but the die was now cast. The Royal Family, who, as was frequently pointed out by the correspondents, could not defend themselves by answering back, were now a legitimate subject for mockery.
Undoubtedly, such lese-majesty was quite unimaginable in 1953 when the coronation of the young radiant Queen seemed to harbinger the dawn of a New Elizabethan Age.
THE CORONATION, 1953
The Radio & Television Retailers Association
21 June 1953
To: The Chief Engineer, Television Service, B.B.C. Alexandra Palace
Dear Sir,
I have the honour to write to you on behalf of the Chairman and members of the Association in the County of Surrey to congratulate you and your staff for the very excellent presentation of the Coronation proceedings on June 2nd last.
Many viewers have told our members how very impressed they were by the high quality of the transmission which brought to them so vividly the Service in Westminster Abbey. The remarkable pictures of Her Majesty in the Abbey and during the processions, together with the clarity of sound on these occasions, has raised the status of television to a new level.
The wonderful results obtained are of course due to first class team work which in turn is possible only with correct management. The members therefore refrain from singling out any particular sector for special mention. It is agreed, we feel, that the remarkable close-ups of Her Majesty, and of the Prince Charles and Princess Anne at the window at Buckingham Palace, amongst many others could not have reached the screens of the receivers without the closest cooperation of the engineers in the transmission links.
It can fairly be said that the results of the broadcast have proved how completely right from all public points of view was the decision to televise the Coronation.
Thank you,
Yours faithfully,
E.B.L.
Ferranti Ltd., Hollinwood, Lancashire
/> 5 June 1953
To: Sir Ian Jacob, K.B.E., Director General, B.B.C. London W1
Dear Sir Ian,
I feel that I must offer you my congratulations on the splendid work of the B.B.C. Television Service throughout the day of Her Majesty’s Coronation.
It would be difficult indeed to select any particular aspect of the work for especial mention. The disposition and use of the cameras within Westminster Abbey was brilliant, and I was most impressed by the maintenance of a steady level of sound volume at all points within the Abbey during the actual ceremony.
The camera units along the route of the procession were similarly used with very great effect, and the results were technically excellent under the rather poor weather conditions.
I am sure that those responsible for the administration, production and technical work are equally deserving of the highest praise.
Yours sincerely,
V.Z. de Ferranti
J, Arthur Rank Organisation Ltd, 38 South Street W1
5 June 1953
To: George R. Barnes Esq., British Broadcasting Corporation London
Dear Barnes,
I feel that I must write and congratulate you on the wonderful job that you did on Coronation Day in televising the Ceremony, and the procession etc. I saw every minute of it and I must say that I was completely enthralled.
Incidentally, I was very glad to think that you could only put on a black and white picture! This, of course, was a very selfish point of view. Nevertheless, my sincerest congratulations.
Yours sincerely,
John Davis
Managing Director
House of Commons, London SW1
4 June 1953
To: Major-General Sir Ian Jacob K.B.E. Broadcasting House W1
My dear Ian,
You will, I know, have been overwhelmed with congratulations over the B.B.C. Television programme on Coronation Day. I have heard nothing but loud and universal praise from all sections of the community – from the highest to the lowest. Having been in the Abbey myself I could not have appreciated more seeing on the T.V. in the evening all the bits one was unable to get a glimpse of in the Abbey.
In one of my hospitals for disabled men they were so impressed and overcome by the T.V. programme that they forgot all about the big party that they intended to have in the evening, and in some of the pubs in my constituency where they had expected some heavy drinking they found that everyone was glued to the T.V. set.
I know that in a job like yours you are apt to hear all the grouses and not much of the praise, but I am sure you should be highly delighted with the great appreciation for all your arrangements. I didn’t hear any of the sound radio myself, but am sure it was equally good.
As you know, my Ministry is ceasing to exist very shortly, so I may either find myself back in the ranks of the wage earners again or precipitated into some other job.
All my good wishes,
Yours ever
Brigadier J.G.S.
V.C. M.C. M.P.
Ministry of Defence, Storey’s Gate, SW1
3 June 1953
To: Lt.General Sir Ian Jacob K.B.E., C.B., Director General B.B.C.
My dear General,
I felt that I must drop you a short line to say that several members of the staff here have particularly remarked on the quite wonderful performance put up on the television programme yesterday (Coronation Day). My wife, too, who is by no means a television fan! particularly remarked on the amazing way the atmosphere and spirit of the Abbey got across in the television programme. Incidentally, my small son had the morning made for him when the cameraman ‘caught’ the Bishop who fell over.
I know how busy you are, so please do not bother to answer this letter.
Yours ever
R.E.
Secretary, Chief of Staffs Committee
P.S. Mr. Profumo rang. He wanted to tell you personally ‘how wonderful the television was yesterday. It was absolutely staggering – I don’t know much about the technical side of how the thing is done – I was viewing in the H of C with about 150 Ministers and people, and we were all terribly impressed.’
Ilkeston, Derbyshire
16 November 1963
To: The Director General, B.B.C.
Dear Sir,
TWTWTW
Having just listened to a particularly crude and offensive shaft of ‘wit’ directed against the Royal Family – I have switched off in disgust.
I had always thought the Royal Family was protected from such vulgarity by a Code of Conduct – apparently I was mistaken. That the B.B.C. does not enforce a better standard of ‘entertainment’ is highly deplorable – it was not always so, and the present tendency to allow ‘dust-Bin’ [sic] humour to be broadcast reveals a shocking lowering of standards. A much more rigid control over the ‘Clever Young Men’ is called for.
Yours faithfully,
G.S.D.
Ringwood, Hampshire
28 April 1963
To: K Adam Esq. CBE, Director of Television, Broadcasting House, London W1
Subject: ‘That was the week that was’ on 27 April 1963
Dear Sir,
I write to record my disgust at the shocking reference made in the above programme to the ‘Royalty of Europe’. I am personally a monarchist but whatever my views on this subject I am sure that the majority of decent minded people will consider that this item was not only disloyal and disrespectful to various Royal houses but it was in the lowest possible taste.
The visitors from Europe accepted an invitation from a Royal Princess of this country to attend the wedding of her daughter and a number of them were blood relations of not only Princess Marina but also Prince Phillip [sic]. The ridicule of these people, a number of advanced years, was disgusting enough, but to do so when they came to this country on the expressed invitation of a member of our own Royal House, it behoves all citizens of this country to show their customary respect.
Only a televised apology from you, sir, or at least the person responsible to Princess Marina and her guests can restore the renowned hospitality which this country has hitherto enjoyed. I would go further and call for the immediate resignation of the person concerned who is obviously totally unfitted to occupy such a position with an organisation where so much harm can be done by thoughtless action or was it intended to be a deliberate reflection on all Royalty?
I trust that this matter will receive your personal attention.
Yours faithfully,
N.V.B. (Lieut. Col.)
Hounslow West, Middlesex
28 March 1965
Dear Sir,
I was ringing your [Television] Centre on Sunday evening from 10.10pm until 11pm and got no reply. Did you give instructions not to answer the Phone during NSMAPMAWOL? Well, I think it was discusting [sic] dam discusting to put on that Program about the Duke of Windsor when his dear Sister was lying dead and he so ill himself. I think your Company is degrading and I am not looking in again. I shall get rid of the television and get out more.
All you talk about now is sex, dirty sex. Why don’t you give up if you cannot find better material? Such stupid [sic] and a waste of time who the hell wants to look at such muck of no value to anyone.
Yours,
M. E. (Mrs.)
Sevenoaks, Kent
28 March 1965
Dear Sir,
I have never before been so incensed by a T.V. programme that I have tried to telephone from my home in the country to protest. I am sorry that your number was engaged, but not surprised, as no doubt hundreds of other decent citizens were also telephoning at the same time.
Whatever any of us may have felt about the abdication at the time, and whatever our feelings are now towards the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, I cannot imagine any programme in worse taste than yours.
As for that man, Frost, whether or not he devises these programmes he should be sacked. His smug smiles are sickening to decent folk.
To say that I am d
isgusted is a gross understatement. I sincerely hope that the volume of protests which you receive will result in a public apology, not only to the Royal Family, but also to such of your viewers as were unfortunate enough to have their sets still on after the news.
Yours faithfully,
R.M.V.
Reading, Berks.
29 March 1965
To the people who performed and allowed the viewing of the opera concerning the Duke and Duchess of Windsor I would like to say in my view all was in very poor and bad taste, stupid not in the spirit of English fair play, the performance was considering the sad loss of our Princess Royal most obnoxious to the extreme. However you lot have all had a fine education also of higher class than myself they didn’t teach you Politeness costs nothing. I apologise for any bad spelling and maybe my written English. I am a poor hardworking old age pensioner.
C. G.
London SW3
29 March 1965
Dear Ned Sherrin,
A protest. I don’t know if it is your fault or not, but I do think you should have insisted that the film on ‘The Windsors’ should have been taken out of ‘Not So Much a Programme, More a Way of Life’. I had just switched over from I.T.V. who had announced that a special tribute to the Princess Royal would be transmitted after the Eamon Andrews Show, thinking the B.B.C. would also announce a similar programme, but to my utter horror and shock saw the film on the Windsors. I just couldn’t believe it. I thought for a moment that the programme had been pre-taped so it would have been impossible to alter but if it was live, it was an utter disgrace.
I have never heard such nonsense – the B.B.C. saying they hadn’t got time to alter it, surely some arrangement could have been made. David Frost could have discussed an extra subject to fill in the time. I think it was in pretty bad taste and most embarrassing – it put an awful clamp on the whole programme. Even Norman St.John Stevas normally so brilliant and witty seemed ‘down’. It was most unfair to your cast and above all to the Windsors whom [sic] I am sure would have been delighted if it had been shown any other time other than a few hours after the death of the Princess Royal who untiringly gave so much of her service to the public.
I'm Sure I Speak For Many Others... Page 3
