2 of 4 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
Still relevant today, May 28 2011
I bought this series on DVD as an exercise in nostalgia. A couple of radio critics had said the programmes were dated and you couldn't get away with Clark's patrician style of lecturing today.
Maybe... But listen to what he's saying. Look at what he's showing us. Within a few minutes I was sitting bolt upright in my chair. This was no exercise in nostalgia. What Clark was saying was more relevant today than when this series was first broadcast in 1969. Then the West was menaced by Communism. Now it's menaced by militant Islam - just as it has been in the past as Clark points out. What seemed like quaint references to the religious foundations of Western civilisation in the atheistic 1960s now have a new relevance. They show what we're fighting for. The series helps define where we came from and where we should be going. It's a classic and like all classics speaks beyond its time. Critics of Western civilisation should view it as well. They'd learn a lot.
Now Kenneth Clark's "Civilisation" has been released on Blu-ray and it keeps getting better and better.
Suffice to say the series looks sumptuous in Blu-ray. In fact, it looks better than most people would have seen it when it was first shown in 1969! Or for that matter any time since on TV. I first saw these programmes on a small screen in black and white. The loss was enormous. By making the series in 35mm the production team locked up an enormous amount of detail in the film. Only now with HD and Blu-ray can we appreciate what is there. The colours are gorgeous and you can see every detail in the works of art. Clark now seems to come into the room. I noticed facial expressions - sometimes a twinkle in the eye - that I never noticed before. These make him more human and his mandarin style more acceptable.
Of course, not everyone will agree with everything Kenneth Clark says. How could they? You would have to be a clone of Kenneth Clark to do that. But so what? The series has sweep and stimulates ideas. If you're one of those people who has dismissed these programmes out of hand - even laughted at them - think again. This series was groudbreaking when it first came out. It was enormously ambitious and pioneered many techniques we now take for granted. From it flowed a huge number of documentaries that have graced our screens ever since. Kenneth Clark was a highly intelligent and knowledgable. Only a fool would reject him out of hand. Many of the things he said are relevant today and have more resonance now than when he first uttered them.
Don't get hung up on the title. There are endless ways we can interpret civilisation. The BBC considered many titles including "One Thousand Years: Reflections on Art and Western Civilisation." This gets nearer to what the programmes are about, but was too ponderous. Clark said it would have been easy in the 18th century. Then you could have entitled the series: "Speculations on the Nature of Civilisation as illustrated by the Changing Phases of Civilised Life in Western Europe from the Dark Ages to the Present Day." But this was impracticable so they settled on what we have now. In the end this is one man's view of Western civilisation and he has many interesting things to say about it.
Clark discussed the making of "Civilisation" in the Foreword to his book on the series. He points out that television is a different medium from print. You can go into intricate arguments on the written page, deal with abstract thought, add footnotes and qualifications and really spread yourself. With television time is limited. Every subject must be simplified. 'Only a few outstanding buildings or works of art can be used as evidence,' he said. 'Only a few great men can be named...Generalisations are inevitable...'
But television can do things that are impossible in print. 'I am convinced,' he writes, 'that a combination of words and music, colour and movement can extend human experience in a way that words alone cannot do. For this reason I believe in television as a medium, and was prepared to give up two years writing to see that could be done with it.'
So the series was a gigantic experiment. No-one at that time had attempted anything as ambitious with so much filmed on location. "Civilisation" raised the standards of television. The medium was more than a Punch and Judy show. It could deal with serious subjects and communicate with a vast audience many of whom, at that time, lacked the opportunities to find out about the arts. The series may creak a little now - Clark himself thought it would be out of date in two or three years - but what is remarkable is how well it stands up to modern viewing. It's an exaggeration to say "Civilisation" is ground zero: intelligent television starts here. There were other intelligent progammes on TV at that time, but nothing on this scale. "Civilisation" is part of our heritage - essential viewing. Like a splendid wine it improves with age.
When first screened the series had enormous impact and changed people's lives. Clark received letters of praise from cabinet ministers (including a future prime minister) and three cardinals. People on the point of suicide changed their minds and carried on living. A student changed his universty course to art and Clark was mobbed like a film star when he went to the United States.
Inevitably there were critics. Satirists sniped. So did jealous intellectuals. Why hadn't they been chosen to present the series instead of Clark? Some were so wide of the mark you wonder how anyone could take them seriously. Still, you can have a good laugh at their absurdity. Marxists - remember them? - hated the series. Others claimed Clark's 'message was fundamentally positive and optimistic.' All Clark discussed, they asserted, was the steady march of progress of Western civilisation - a civilisation superior to all others. He did no such thing. The programmes contain scepticism and many doubts. Episode 12 is called 'The Fallacies of Hope.'
Unbelievably, a university lecturer complained about Clark's 'sophisticated vocabulary.' You needed a dictionary, she argued, to follow what Clark said although he translates foreign expressions and explains technical terms when he uses them. She objected to 'slow-moving and staid camera movements, fetishized close-ups, loving pans of great works of art, and dulcet tones of chamber music.' They conveyed, she said, 'an aura of serious contemplation.'
How, for heaven's sake, are you expected to examine great works of art - works of genius? Just a quick glance and move on? As for music - there's a wide variety carefully chosen. Besides chamber music there's plainchant, symphonies, great choral works, opera, Monteverdi's Vespers and a great deal more. Nearly all of it was written within 20 years of the object shown on the screen. So the music complements what we're watching. Is two minutes too long to listen to a church organ on which Bach and Mozart played? If you've got the attention span of that lecturer it is.
As for those who still snipe at the series I issue a challenge - produce something that's better than Kenneth Clark's 'Civilisation.' Go on - do it.
In the meantime, I recommend the series is included on every school and college art course and elsewhere in the curriculum. The programmes talk up to their audience, not down, and will make them think. Each episode is divided into chapters 7 or 8 minutes long. Even if teachers don't want to show their students whole episodes they could show extracts and stimulate interest that way. If educators are too myopic to show "Civilisation" then students can now buy the series on Blu-ray and watch it at home. They'll gain a wider appreciation of art and civilisation and be one-up on the class. And who knows - the series might change your life...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No