Friday, January 20, 2012

TV review: The Crusades | Jonathan Meades on France

Dr Thomas Asbridge's documentary on the Crusades was storytelling of the highest quality

"The story of the crusades is remembered as one of religious fanaticism and unspeakable violence," said Dr Thomas Asbridge in the opening sequence of his new three-part documentary series, The Crusades (BBC2). "But now fresh research from both the Christian and Islamic worlds sheds new light on how these great religions waged war in the name of God." Hmm. I'm not sure if I ever knew enough about the Crusades in the first place to appreciate all the subtleties of Asbridge's revisionism ? the opening episode was still waist-deep in religious fanaticism and unspeakable violence ? but I was more than happy to go along with it, as this was storytelling of the highest quality.

It was also storytelling on the cheap. Unlike the many other history documentaries that go in for expensive special effects and re-enactments to make an impact, The Crusades was mostly just one passionate man and a camera. And whether it was Asbridge leafing through an Armenian text that even he couldn't read, or him standing in front of an imposing piece of rock that he insisted was the last standing gate of the ancient city of Antioch but which could have been anything for all I could tell, he was never less than utterly engaging. Above all, it worked because Asbridge struck a perfect balance between the broad-brush and the personal, with half-remembered names such as Godfrey of Bouillon and Raymond of Toulouse coming alive in the imagination if not on screen.

If it had a fault, it was that Asbridge sometimes assumed more knowledge than I had. I couldn't help wondering why, if it took at least a year after Pope Urban II's proclamation of 1095 for the First Crusade to reach Asia Minor, the Muslim world was so taken by surprise. And since 90% of the Crusaders had died or deserted before they reached Jerusalem, why didn't some of the richer ones save themselves the effort and sail there? I'm sure the answers are obvious and I'm merely parading my ignorance, but I'd still like to know.

The programme ended with the Christians in control of Jerusalem and Asbridge foreshadowing 200 years of jihadi vengeance, though the unspoken subtext throughout was that the violence had never really ended. Nor was that the only piece of pattern-recognition on offer, as it became clear that starting a war to divert attention from domestic problems at home is a long-standing tradition rather than a 20th- and 21st-century phenomenon. Pope Urban's proclamation that kicked off the Crusades had little to do with the Muslims and a great deal to do with the growing schism between the eastern and western Christian traditions. God help us all. If there is one.

On a good night for minimalist factual programming, one man and a camera were also out and about in Jonathan Meades on France (BBC4).

I'm not sure why Meades insists on looking like an ageing rou� from Reservoir Dogs by wearing a black suit, white shirt, black tie and Ray-Bans for most of the programme ? dark glasses don't exactly improve eye contact with the viewer and it all feels a bit deliberately try-hard and wacky ? but I guess every presenter is entitled to their shtick. Meades's is to be wilfully idiosyncratic.

"No onions, no Dordogne, no boules, no Piaf and no Gallic shrugs," he said at the top of the programme. "I am going to stick to the letter V." Mr Violet, perhaps?

Tics aside, I can forgive a lot in any programme about France that doesn't resort to familiar tropes, though much as I came to enjoy my hour in Meades' company ? not least for the surreal, quasi-subliminal images that flashed on to the screen from time to time for no very good reason ? I wasn't entirely sure I really understood what it was he did want to say about France. We started with V for valise and an accompanying shot of an old suitcase before cutting to the Algerian war of 1954-62 and Meades dead-panning that it was this threat of violence that had lured him to France as a 15-year-old.

We then raced through various other random Vs ? Vichy, Verdun, Vauban and Vaud�mont ? though not before going off piste into the Ns for Nancy, the Ms for the Mistral font, the Ls for Lorraine, the As for Alsace and the Ts for Les Trentes Glorieuses. Still, it was fun to watch and I came away feeling better informed if not wiser. And if Meades's point was that ideas of identity are often incoherent, transitory and contradictory, then his film was the ideal format.


guardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2012/jan/18/the-crusades-thomas-asbridge-review

Mafia United States Job hunting City breaks Butterflies Skiing

No comments:

Post a Comment