Raiders of the Lost Archive

❉ In this digital TV age, where choice is supposedly everywhere, why is old TV so hard to find? Steve O’Brien investigates.

“For most viewers, the distant past of TV is frustratingly out of touch. While it’s possible to be a radio junkie and stumble across not just the joys of the Beatles and the Stones, but Nick Drake and Wire, there’s no such opportunity for telly-curious millennials….”

Step into any library or bookshop and, though those promotional stands may be made up of the hot-off-the-press offerings from Cormac McCarthy, David Walliams or Daisy Johnson, you don’t have to wander far to ferret out something much older. In bookshops, the old isn’t cordoned off or heaved into a skip once public tastes deem it irrelevant. Likewise, aged music isn’t vetoed from the radio or Spotify for not sounding modern enough. Mystifyingly, the same can’t be said of TV of a faraway vintage, so why is certain old television considered untransmittable now where old music and old books are simply thought of as unmovable parts of our cultural heritage?
‘Public Eye’: Alfred Burke with Leslie Lawton, 1969.

There is, admittedly, a universe and a half of difference in how TV looks now to how it did 40 years ago. To the a modern-day viewer, raised on the cinematic ambitions and galloping pace of Game of Thrones or Line of Duty, old telly looks rather like filmed theatre, a stagey, frills-three recording of a night at the Old Vic. Watch any primetime drama of the 1970s and you’ll see dialogue-thick scenes lasting five, ten, 15 minutes sometimes. To viewers under the age of 30 TV of that era must look as exotic and mysterious as silent movies did to their parents.

At the beginning of the 1980s there were, of course, only four channels to choose from. But in today’s bounteous digital era, the numbers run deep into the hundreds. You’d think that explosion of channels would gift us greater choice, that our vast televisual heritage would be but a click away. But no. Television’s past, it seems, is further away than it ever was. Granted, there are channels, deep into Sky’s box listings, that exist purely to screen long-forgotten curios from the dustiest, darkest corners of the archives, but, while much respect to Talking Pictures TV or True Entertainment, there’s little thirst for repeats of Public Eye, Dick Barton: Special Agent or The Human Jungle. Anyhow, these are niche channels, with miniscule budgets and tiny viewing figures. You have to already be sympathetic to the pleasures of elderly TV and movies to even know they’re there.

But what of the vast array of other TV oldies in the vaults? Classic TV junkies have access to some of it (there are dedicated DVD outfits like Network and Simply Media that specialise in this stuff), but – again – you have to have already been seduced by antique television to then shed out £9.99 on it.

There’s a narrow canon of popular vintage TV that’s currently the only pre-1990 content you can see on the tentpole digital channels. Once upon a time, Gold (or UK Gold as it was then) was a place where you could seek out archive gems not repeated in a generation – Doomwatch, The Lotus Eaters, Survivors, Secret Army – but now it simply exists to house wall-to-wall repeats of the established favourites – Only Fools and Horses, Porridge, Opens All Hours et al – series that already have a welcome home on the terrestrial channels. More arcane sitcoms – John Sullivan’s Sitting Pretty, Clement and La Frenais’ Thick As Thieves, Galton and Simpson’s Citizen James, as just three examples – remain unseen since their first transmissions.

It’s not just a problem with traditional channels. The vast majority of Netflix’s TV programming are either box-fresh hits like Happy Valley or Benidorm or shows from the same small pool as Gold, Watch and Dave fish from. The hope of ever seeing Q (Spike Milligan’s loopy sketch show that Monty Python admit was their biggest influence), Z-Cars (the template of which has informed every police drama to come after it) or A Very Peculiar Practice (possibly writer Andrew Davies’ greatest ever drama) seems very distant.

There was hope when the BBC announced the opening of BBC Store. Launched in 2015, it was cooked into existence to put some of the corporation’s vast library onto the open market. There were pearls there, many not seen for 30, 40 years. A smattering of Dennis Potter plays, Oranges Are Not The Only Fruit, the nightmare-inducing 80s rabies drama The Mad Death, Alan Bennett’s Talking Heads… Finally, without the overheads of producing physical media, there was a place that allowed us to see some of these obscure treasures. Yet last year, BBC Store announced its closure. With the rest of the media world going streaming crazy, BBC Store looked like an anachronism, with its digital buy-to-own MO.

For most viewers, the distant past of TV is frustratingly out of touch. While it’s possible to be a radio junkie and stumble across not just the joys of the Beatles and the Stones, but Nick Drake and Wire, there’s no such opportunity for telly-curious millennials.

“The very act of ‘stumbling across something’ on television is dying out,” says Jack Kibble-White, one of the founders of the nostalgia site, TV Cream. “Viewers today make active choices on what they want to watch, which means they pick stuff they know, or believe will be like stuff they have previously like. And where they are happy to stumble across something, it’s via an interface that serves them up recommendations based upon what they have previously watched. Television consumption, like all things in the digital age, is increasingly becoming an echo chamber of only seeing and hearing stuff that is similar to those things you’ve seen and heard before.”

It wasn’t always like this. In 1993, BBC2 hosted a whole evening devoted to programmes made in its Lime Grove studios in the 1960s. In 1986 BBC1 put on an entire season of scratchy Hancock’s Half Hours, most of them over a quarter of a century old, on Sunday evenings. Repeats of Harold Pinter’s 1962 TV play The Lover and Jack Rosenthal’s Ready When You Are, Mr McGill were screened as part of Channel Four’s Frank Muir-curated TV Heaven season on Saturday nights in 1992.

Ken Loach’s The Price of Coal (BBC)

Theatre productions are, of course, regularly restaged. A play by Terence Rattigan or Peter Shaffer has an infinite life in the theatre, but there are television plays and serials by Dennis Potter, by David Mercer, by Alan Bleasdale, by Alan Garner, that exist only in the BBC or ITV archives (if they survived at all – much old TV was wiped in the 1960s and 70s). They may not have the marquee-friendly title of a Pennies from Heaven or a Boys from the Blackstuff, but they’re still vital, relevant work. There’s currently nowhere where you can see Barry Hines’ 1977 play, The Price of Coal. Dennis Potter’s Blackeyes has never been repeated, nor granted a VHS or DVD release, since it was broadcast in 1989.

“Showing old TV isn’t as cheap as people suppose so it can be a risk,” says Dick Fiddy, TV consultant for the British Film Institute. “The risk is lessened if you show something within the last 20 years as it’s in comparatively recent memory. Also it will be of a better technical quality and may even be in the modern ratio.”

The vast aesthetic jump from television’s old standard of 625 lines to the now dominant 1080p and the encroaching 4k means that older programming sits more and more incongruously on our evermore sophisticated screens. When we were watching 4×3-shaped 625-line television in the 1980s and ’90s and a black and white repeat from television’s 405-line days came on, the difference was marked but, on the whole, we could deal with it. But no channel now would ever schedule an episode of Dixon of Dock Green next to a gleaming high-def copy of Line of Duty – the difference in picture quality is too jarring.

Things are getting better, however. The BBC’s iPlayer, as a reaction to the closing down of BBC Store, has begin to house more and more period content in their From The Archive section. Clearly curated by a team who know their TV stuff, it occasionally throws up some obscure jewels, but with only 449 programmes currently available, it’s but a tiny dip into the corporation’s vast library.
“Complete access to the archive is the Holy Grail and I do believe there has been some movement towards that,” says Fiddy. “But the access won’t be free. It’s an expensive business and isn’t currently covered by advertising revenue or the licence fee.”

One possible reason for all this is that television watching has long-been thought of as a rather worthless cultural pursuit, the poor fourth leisure activity behind books, theatre and the cinema. People don’t label themselves TV fans with the same sense of chest-puffing pride as film fans do. It requires a bit of justification, so people don’t just think you’re talking about Call The Midwife and Bake Off. For those into this stuff, the BFI stages regular screenings of long-unseen programmes (notably their Missing Believed Wiped seasons). But, as Fiddy notes, the differences in production technique require a bit of context for younger eyes.

“The different pacing, the style of studio drama are all things very alien now,” he says. “Once people have got over the initial ‘difference’ of the material they seem okay. A tiny bit of explanation goes a long way. Of course there’s benefits in absorbing culture from the past, whether literature, film, music of TV. That realisation that certain ideas, philosophies, concerns, obsessions have a kind of universality that transcends their time is illuminating. TV in particular – with its ephemeral nature – does a very good job of holding a mirror up to its times and giving us a greater understanding of the way people thought and behaved in the past  and how that impacts on the present and will impact on the future.”

Dixon Of Dock Green (Acorn Media)

“I do think the general public’s appetite to old TV has changed and will continue to change,” says Kibble-White. “Twenty to 30 years ago, older programmes sat relatively easily in the television schedules alongside newer programmes and their function – like all telly – was to provide entertainment and/or information. The archive programming that remains (such as Top of the Pops repeats on BBC Four) is usually explicitly contextualised as something from a previous era, meaning the audience comes to in a historical context, rather than just consumes it as they would any other show. This inevitably creates a distance between the viewer and the archive programme they are watching.”

There is hope that things may be changing however. In November last year, the BBC’s Director-General, Tony Hall, announced plans to launch the corporation’s very own paid-for on-demand service. “We are looking at ways… to allow people to access the back catalogue [in a way] that costs something because you pay for that access,” Hall said. Of course, the question is how far-reaching is this range of programmes likely to be? While there’s an obvious need for a central hub to access its most popular shows, would the BBC want its 2019 brand contaminated with programming of a different vintage, with a different aesthetic and production values? We can be sure that Sherlock will be on this new streaming site, but what about the surviving episodes of the Beeb’s 1965 Sherlock Holmes series? The new Doctor Who will no doubt be on there, but what about any William Hartnell episodes? Let’s hope they dig deep and wide for their content. This isn’t about nostalgia, this is about heritage.


❉ Steve O’Brien is a film and television journalist, and the co-writer (with Simon Guerrier) of ‘Doctor Who: Whographica: An Infographic Guide to Space and Time’ and ‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Slayer Stats’. Follow Steve on Twitter

❉ Join Steve O’Brien as he shares his Perfect Night In with Neil Perryman: http://perfectnightin.tv/podcast/episode-four/ . You can also listen to the show via Soundcloud or iTunes or download the mp3.

Like this feature? Why not support us on Patreon?

6 Comments

  1. The comparison with books and music is hardly a valid one, though, is it? Books and music were put out there to be bought and owned; to be re-read or re-played over and over. As long as individual items keep selling they’d remain available, but fall below a threshold and they’re gone too. Is there streaming service with Gail Ann Dorsey’s debut album? Or any of Medicine Head’s Polydor releases? How many years or months would I have to listen to music radio to hear even a single track from either of those never mind the whole things?

    A more realistic comparison would be with programming made especially for radio. What proportion of live concerts broadcast in the 1960s and 1970s are available now? What about radio plays? It’s not so many, is it?

    There’s difference between, if you like, publishers and broadcasters. Publishers – the people who put out content to be bought directly by the consumer and consumed multiple times by each of them – and broadcasters whose content certainly used to be consumed once live and that was that. The lines are now very blurred, but the archive content you’re talking about was created under one model and people now want it to be made available by another.

    Another problem is time. I’d bet you could consume in a single year all the new music played from record on the BBC Light Programme in 1967, and spend little more than half an hour per day doing it. If they all existed, the same amount of time would get you the new episodes of Coronation Street, Crossroads and Emergency – Ward Ten from the same year, and nothing else. Even if you restrict it to the five old terrestrial channels, no one could have enough time to watch all new TV now. If all old TV was suddenly put online for free, a significant proportion of it would never be watched again even if it was available for the next hundred years.

    It may be true that many people won’t happen upon much archive TV by chance these days, and so not know what goodies are on offer there. But isn’t the same true of much music? Unless you already know about it and know where to find it or what terms to search for, how much dub or rocksteady will people come across by accident? How much death metal, Krautrock or barbershop? It’s all relative.

  2. It’s hard not to conclude that the inequities in the actual wiping/junking process and the lack of cultural merit afforded television programmes at the time that class came into it. Despite early Reithian pretensions to educate, it quickly became the cultural domain of the working class household. In august fashionable houses, it was that box hidden away in a fine cabinet in the corner of the room, so one’s visitors couldn’t pass cutting commentary upon one’s guilty secrets.

  3. One point that seemed to be missed altogether was that in the pre-1960s (and into the mid-60s for that matter), a lot of TV programmes were broadcast live and so were never recorded. So, if Bob Monkhouse hadn’t recorded it (as he had one of the earliest video recorders at the time and its thanks to him that some of the TV archives survive today), its likely to be lost forever.

  4. An interesting article.
    It fails to touch on something that I believe lies heavily to blame for lack of vintage television exposure. The four/five or so main channels have for some time stuck to a very strict regime of generally palatable modern ‘populist’ entertainment/family oriented programming that only rarely stretches its remit by inclusion of segmented archive/specialist or foreign drama programmes.

    I’m unsure whether it is simply because there are far more channels to chose from now or the fact that the main channels have just flat out decided not to compete with the other ‘specialist’ channels and limit their output? Whatever the reason, they seem to keep things very safe. By example compare efforts made to conquer the ratings by main channels over the Christmas/New Year periods in recent years with festive television schedules of the past three decades. It all seems very limited in range and scope of programming now.
    Archive film is also highly problematic, there appears to be a very limited scope for screening a range of archive films across the main channels, these ‘safe’ mostly blockbuster film choices are also scheduled on semi-regular repeat cycles. Where is the wide range of classic film we once used to see in the schedules?

    To directly pick up on a point in the article, I’m not actually sure that the technical picture quality of the majority of vintage television screening formats is that much of an issue. Everyday there are broadcasts of shows filmed on 16mm film stock that have undergone very little restoration work, yet still have reasonable viewing figures. Perhaps if the cost of restored/remastered material is comparatively similar to that of more modern programmes (that are more palatable ratings winners) many channels will be put off by the cost as well as potential ratings ‘risk’ of archive material.

    Of course, that all said, let us also consider the content of some of the archive shows, some of the programmes had very basic production values, values that could easily be ridiculed and dismissed by an audience of today. Many old but quite well regarded drama’s do suffer from set design deficiencies, line fluffs, slightly dodgy scene edits, wonky music etc and I think that may also be a major consideration for the main channels not to touch them. Some programmes also contain strong elements of cultural attitudes from their time of making and many of these attitudes would be hugely problematic for a modern audience, no channel would want to rock the boat by showing, say, 70’s comedy ‘Love Thy Neighbour’ these days…

    I detected a slight belittling of the many channels found on Freeview or satellite screening many vintage programmes. These channels are in fact very popular and have an increasing following (just look at social media responses to each of the channel’s output)
    The fact that the amount of channels showing archive programming has not only remained stable but also increased in recent years does indicate a healthy following is out there.

    Vintage/archive t.v. is alive and it’s not all that tucked away, it will however remain pretty much resigned to ‘niche’ channels as the big players generally continue to shy away due to their ingrained comfort zones of operation so they stick to easy choices of whatever maintains their profit/sponsorship.
    The general viewing public via the main networks therefore misses out on exposure to the wealth of older programming, so the less awareness, the less the demand, archive material will always now remain unable to generate an impact on mainstream television in any significant way unless the shackles are released.

  5. There was always someone grumbling about black and white television programmes and films being shown once most people were paying a colour licence fee. You mention the Hancock repeats on BBC1 but this might be the last time vintage television was shown on the flagship channel in a prime slot and it wasn’t universally appreciated. Channel 4 spent much of its early days showing the programmes ITV weren’t going to show anymore; older material has been a sidestream thing ever since the sidestreams started and I don’t see that changing.

    Some sitcom still uses multicamera studios and interlaced video but drama doesn’t, so any drama in that medium will now look strange to most modern audiences. Audiences are also now so accustomed to progressive digital video or restored filmstock that anything on made film will stick out badly if has so much as a speck of dust on it. I like watching old television myself but I know I’m in a minority.

Have your say...