Michael Portillo on the West Somerset Railway

[Ian L Jamieson]

Portillo was having a generally good time on the WSR last night apparently on a Churchward 2-8-0 , but the inside shots clearly showed 6960 above the driver's head.

Apart from the obvious lack of continuity, I was not aware that Raveningham Hall had been to the WSR recently, if at all. This tends to be the way of this programme, using shots from different locations. Not that it matters - it doesn't spoil my enjoyment of them.

[the green mile]

6960 has been running on the WSR for at least the past year. I photographed her at Minehead last April and again at Bishops Lydeard back in December.

[Ian L Jamieson]

Thanks. I must have read about it in the Railway Mag - and then forgotten!

[railwest]

I watched that programme and also the one on the following day on the L&BR etc. I found it confusing in the latter when he was at Barnstaple (Junction) and talking about the run-down of the line to Exeter, yet this was accompanied by archive shots of Lynton and the L&BR!

Curious that, in a series of programmes supposedly devoted to tracing IK Brunel from Paddington to Newton Abbot, he should go from Salisbury to Yeovil, Lynton to Banstaple, then Barnstaple to Exeter Central and on to Exmouth! Very definitely a Great Way Round

[Robin Summerhill]

I watched that programme and also the one on the following day on the L&BR etc. I found it confusing in the latter when he was at Barnstaple (Junction) and talking about the run-down of the line to Exeter, yet this was accompanied by archive shots of Lynton and the L&BR!

This summarises the reasons why I gave up watching the programmes.

Whilst we have discussed on other threads the fact that the general public couldn't give a monkey's about these things, it does irritate me when, for example, he is supposed to be on a train between Brockenhurst and Bournemouth and they throw in a shot of Dawlish "on the way" .....

[jules]

Typical Tory. Can't believe a single word that comes out of his mouth ... In any context!

[mangotsfield_mauler]

This summarises the reasons why I gave up watching the programmes.

Whilst we have discussed on other threads the fact that the general public couldn't give a monkey's about these things, it does irritate me when, for example, he is supposed to be on a train between Brockenhurst and Bournemouth and they throw in a shot of Dawlish "on the way" .....

I understand that for attention to detail, but isn't it nice to have some railway related programmes? Even the Attenbrough nature programmes are mocked up; the owls hunting in the snow are staged. I think Railway Journeys programmes are well produced, far from condescending or poking fun at "anoraks". The Welsh Railways shows straight after have been great too. Let's have more of this, how many times have we complained when trains aren't covered?

[Robin Summerhill]

This summarises the reasons why I gave up watching the programmes.

Whilst we have discussed on other threads the fact that the general public couldn't give a monkey's about these things, it does irritate me when, for example, he is supposed to be on a train between Brockenhurst and Bournemouth and they throw in a shot of Dawlish "on the way" .....

I understand that for attention to detail, but isn't it nice to have some railway related programmes? Even the Attenbrough nature programmes are mocked up; the owls hunting in the snow are staged. I think Railway Journeys programmes are well produced, far from condescending or poking fun at "anoraks". The Welsh Railways shows straight after have been great too. Let's have more of this, how many times have we complained when trains aren't covered?

And specifically:

Even the Attenbrough nature programmes are mocked up; the owls hunting in the snow are staged

TV programmes of all descriptions, even the News, are edited together. There is the well-known remark of a cameraman covering a famine in Africa some years ago: "find me a dying baby..."

Fred Dibnah's tour of Britain in his traction engine was mainly carried out on the back of a low loader, with the engine only actually covering short distances for the camera.

These things happen - that's how TV works. But to get back to my original example, if you as a presenter (ie Michael Portillo) are saying that you are going by train from A to B and the camera cuts to some pretty countryside on the way, then the countryside you should be showing is something that is actually on the way, and not a few shots just bunged in of somewhere else in the country and not necessarily anywhere near the journey that is being taken. In truth, this is just sloppiness on the part of the production team, who either can't be bothered to search their archives properly, or perhaps can't be arsed to actually get a shot of the area being covered if there's not one in the archives.

Does anybody else remember Roy Kethro's post on another subject some time ago when "an old diesel locomotive" was portrayed on TV by a Bullied unrebuilt pacific?

Another example - if you were watching a news broadcast about, lets say, a speech by David Cameron, most people would have something to say if a clip of the prime minister of Australia was featured half way through, put there because the producer thought "Oh well, its a prime minister, innit, doesn't make any difference"

Do you see where I'm coming from? I suppose my argument can be summarised as "if you're going to take on a job, do it properly"

[mangotsfield_mauler]

Do you see where I'm coming from? I suppose my argument can be summarised as "if you're going to take on a job, do it properly"

Fully understand. However, I'm sure cost is the issue. it's probably the best attempt at a niche interest by a researcher who is not probably paid enough or doesn't have access to suitable archives due to budget restrictions.

Current affairs stuff you mention is a bit of a red herring, as that's far more public interest than a hobbyist's programme, it affects more people, therefore would attract more budget. I'm just happy that they're giving trains the nod, in a rather pleasant and enthusiastic way, rather than dishing out another smug knockdown of "anoraks". :D

[jules]

Given the presenter and the target audience, I can tolerate the shortcomings and I agree - it is good to see railways covered once again. I've particularly enjoyed "Locomotion" - a good (and even fairly accurate) look at some of the real history involved.

However, back to Mr Portaloo - I do find it amusing when a 125 pulls into a station, he boards it and a minute later, he is mysteriously sitting on a 158!

Now, talking about railway TV programmes, does anybody remember a series narrated by John Peel, from what I remember once again fairly factual and talking of late BR steam days? Must have been back in the early 1990s or even before, probably on Channel 4?

I'd love to get a copy of that series ...

BTW, I just watched the Bristol Bath Road video last night, lent to me by (a rather more mature looking!) Mr Cronin. My particular favourite bit was the old fashioned stores and little window True history now we have mechanised warehousing and the like. How did they ever get a Paxman Ventura + generator out through that little hole?

[jules]

I'm just happy that they're giving trains the nod, in a rather pleasant and enthusiastic way, rather than dishing out another smug knockdown of "anoraks".

You should get hold of a book called "Platform Souls" - sub-title "The trainspotter as a 20th century hero" by I think Nicholas Whittaker. It's usually available from Amazon. The best defence of rail enthusiasts I have ever read and a real trip down memory lane. If you grew up in the 60s with the early diesels as I did, it positively drips nostalgia ...

It raises an interesting point really: there doesn't seem to be anything like as much bashing of enthusiasts by the press nowadays - not like there was ten years or more ago certainly. Could it be that an increasing percentage of the population now seems to be discovering what a great way to travel trains really are, that maybe the press feels less sure about placing the railway in a negative light?

Or maybe there are just less spotters because quite simply, there is nothing much interesting to look at anymore ...

[carpetcone]

However, back to Mr Portaloo -

Tut tut, I hope that was just a slip of the keyboard?!???

[jules]

However, back to Mr Portaloo -


Tut tut, I hope that was just a slip of the keyboard?!???

Nope. An accurate description. Full of sh 1 t ... just like the rest of them, despite trying to "soften himself up" wit ha career as a (not very good) TV presenter

[the green mile]

[quote="jules"][quote]
: there doesn't seem to be anything like as much bashing of enthusiasts by the press nowadays - not like there was ten years or more ago.

Or maybe spotters have been driven underground by the railway jobsworth police we keep hearing about in the railway press.

[Robin Summerhill]

Or maybe spotters have been driven underground by the railway jobsworth police we keep hearing about in the railway press.

But also there's quite simply tiny numbers compared to what it was like when we were trainspotting kids.

Temple Meads in the 60s, especially at the end of platform 4/5 (as it was then - I still haven't really come to terms with the new platform numbering despite having worked there ) was absolutely crawling with kids and young adult males (well, 99.99% were male - there was one girl who was in the crowd in the early 60s as I seem to recall).

These days you might see half a dozen people with notebooks in their hands on the station - and most of them seem to me to be "of a certain age..."