From the Ridiculous to the Sublime, excerpts from Port Folio Weekly

From the Ridiculous to the Sublime
By Tom Robotham
Tuesday, May. 8, 2007


OK, let me get a disclaimer out of the way right off the bat: My wife works for WHRO. In fact, she’s the chief development officer. This, however, has nothing to do with my emphasis on public broadcasting in these pages. My track record on the issue speaks for itself. I’ve been a passionate advocate of public television and public radio for 30 years and have been writing about it in Port Folio Weekly for nearly a decade.

Moreover, I tend to be a critical friend of WHRO in particular and PBS in general. I believe whole heartedly in the mission of public broadcasting – and in its continuing necessity – but I also have a problem with some of the ways in which it falls short of that mission.

Its failings are most glaringly apparent during television pledge drives, when regular programming is displaced by the likes of Andre Rieu. We can debate the merits of the self-proclaimed "Waltz King" if you like. PBS president Paula Kerger, for example, whom I’ve interviewed for these pages, suggests that he’s introducing new audiences to classical music. To my mind, on the other hand, his concerts – an odd blend of music and third-rate vaudeville humor – reinforce the all-too-prevalent notion that classical music is too boring to stand on its own and so must be wrapped in schtick. The fact that it’s bad schtick makes it all the more offensive, but really, even if the jokes were actually funny I’d have a problem with it. Good music, not to mention great music, is sublime. That may not be immediately apparent to people who are unaccustomed to particular styles, but serving up music on a cheesy platter won’t change this, any more than reruns of The Lawrence Welk Show (which some public stations also air) have the potential to help people appreciate the bluesy punch of the Count Basie Orchestra. There are other ways of introducing people to classical music, as Leonard Bernstein demonstrated so effectively when he was in his prime. (I wish PBS would rebroadcast his educational programs – or find some young conductor who could do something similar today.) But Andre Rieu ain’t it.

Glad I GOT that off my chest.

I certainly don’t hold it against Kerger that she sees some merit in Rieu’s cavalcades of kitsch. For one thing, I’m perfectly willing to admit that I might be wrong about the Waltz King. (I’m perfectly willing to admit that I might be wrong about everything.) Second, it doesn’t really matter because on the big-picture stuff, Kerger is very compelling. She comes across as an ardent and supremely articulate advocate for the arts (she used to work for the Metropolitan Opera), a fierce defender of the First Amendment and as someone who understands the limits of the "free market." One of the most important points she made during our conversation was that A&E and Bravo – two channels that have supposedly contributed to PBS’s obsolescence – are not even a mere shell of what they once were. Both stations were conceived as showcases for the arts. Now they are vehicles for reruns of dramas like CSI, The Sopranos, Sex and the City or a variety of "reality" shows.

Like Kerger, I enjoy many of these shows – though I must say that cleansing The Sopranos of "offensive" language so it could pass muster on A&E is comparable to reworking a great recipe for homemade tomato sauce until it tastes like the stuff in Franco-American spaghetti – i.e., it’s a sin against art.

But again, I digress.

Her point, and mine, is that the often-heard argument that PBS is obsolete is absurd. Attempts to present on commercial television programs of socially or culturally redeeming value have repeatedly fizzled. PBS, meanwhile, has forged ahead with programs like Frontline, American Experience, Great Performances, Nature, Charlie Rose and Bill Moyers Journal – programs that enrich viewers’ lives immeasurably but that surely would have "failed" had they been judged solely by ratings.

I also believe Kerger when she says that there is an unbreachable "firewall" between corporate underwriting and editorial decision-making. Professional journalists and broadcasters are, for the most part, much too proud, principled and passionate about what they do to cave in to pressure from advertisers or underwriters.

Not that journalists, producers and on-air hosts have all the power. The recent firing of Don Imus is a case in point. To my mind, CBS’ firing of Imus was a stellar example of corporate cowardice. It certainly had nothing to do with principle. On the contrary, Imus was doing what was expected of him – shocking audiences in an effort to drive ratings. In this case, he simply went "too far" – i.e., the backlash threatened CBS’ bottom line.

But this sort of caving in to advertiser pressure is not the primary problem with commercial media. Rather, it is the tendency to develop programming with an eye toward ratings rather than a vision of cultural excellence.

Popularity and artistic merit aren’t always mutually exclusive. As Shakespeare demonstrated, it’s quite possible to produce artistic entertainment that is multilayered and therefore appeals to a variety of audiences simultaneously. For the most part, though, today’s programming executives – on both television and radio – aren’t interested in such things. They’re interested in programming that maximizes profits in the simplest and most cost-effective way.

PBS is an exception to this rule, because it is still run with a social and cultural mission – rather than profit – in mind.

So is NPR, of course. When I interviewed Bert Schmidt, the new president of WHRO, I made a point of asking him whether he was committed to backing the two radio stations that exist under the WHRO brand.

He told me that both the classical operation (90.3) and the talk/music format of WHRV (89.5) have his full support.

This was reassuring, indeed. I’ve also been a critic of WHRO-FM in recent years, questioning their decision to discourage on-air hosts from talking about the music and from playing anything that’s too long or artistically challenging. But those are fine points. When I step back and consider that we in the Seven Cities have a 24/7 classical station, while most other markets do not, I realize what a blessing it is.

As for WHRV-FM, I can’t imagine life here without it. Out of the Box, Sinnett in Session and HearSay – not to mention the syndicated news and talk shows like Talk of the Nation – are cultural gems of the first order. There is no commercial radio station that comes close in quality, either in their music or their talk segments.

Schmidt also impressed me with his emphasis on the importance of local programming on both public radio and public television. WHRO-TV, especially, could be improved with the addition of some new local talk shows, news magazine programs and documentaries. And it sounds to me like Schmidt wants to make that happen.

In short, I felt pretty encouraged after my conversations with Schmidt and Kerger. If nothing else, it was refreshing to hear two people actually acknowledge the weaknesses in their organizations rather than simply trying to put a positive spin on everything. More important, it was exhilarating to talk with people with vision. In light of this, I sense that good days are ahead for both WHRO and PBS generally.

If only they’d dump the Waltz King.