Re: Black Radio 4 announcer
- From: Peter Duncanson <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:48:04 +0100
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 00:25:54 +0100, "John Dean"
On Mar 25, 9:06 pm, "John Dean" <john-d...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 25, 5:46 pm, "John Dean" <john-d...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mike M wrote:
One for the UKians (possibly World Service).
There is an announcer on Radio 4 who is obviously afro-caribbean
(caps?), and has clearly been chosen for his deep, fruity,
resonant voice. Think Paul Robson.
Do you use afro-caribbean to mean black?
More proof that some people don't read subject lines.
I read subject lines. You clearly don't read posts.
Maybe I read too much into them. I couldn't imagine why you asked
whether Mike used "afro-caribbean" to mean black when in the subject
line he used "black" to mean black.
The point has been raised many times here that some use newsreaders which
don't make subject lines available. (My newsreader does, but I thought it
was a convention we were aspiring to). It's been pointed out that courtesy
and completeness suggest that whatever is in the subject line should also be
in the body of the post. Mike used "black" in the subject line" but not in
the post. "black" and "afro caribbean" are not synonymous.
And I couldn't imagine why you
asked why he mentioned the announcer's accent. It seemed obvious--he
was describing the voice of someone who he knew only by voice and who
most others here would know only that way. As I said, this was an
effective way to identify him.
If he knew him only by voice, how would he know he was black?
"Most others" here might remember this announcer was the subject of a thread
last year and therefore know exactly who was under discussion.
I didn't ask why he mentioned the accent. Even the dimmest among us can see
that the entire point of the post was the accent. I asked why he mentioned
that the man was black.
But apparently I missed something. Why did you ask Mike those
I didn't wish to make an assumption so I phrased my thought ("are you using
"afro-caribbean" to mean black?" or indeed "are you using "black" to mean
"afro-caribbean?)" in the form of a question. I think it an acceptable
rhetorical device. My second question was why he introduced the question of
colour. I may have missed it in all the excitement, but I haven't seen an
answer to that, other than his sentiment in another sub-thread that "I
mentioned that he's black mainly to identify the person concerned to the
UKian radio listeners on here." which seems weird - why would radio
listeners want to or indeed be able to identify a voice by knowing the owner
I understood Mike to be using "black" in the subject line and
"obviously afro-caribbean" as a means of identifying the man by his
voice. His accent is one that is recognisable as one associated
predominantly with people who are some variety of black or
afro-caribbean. It would be very unusual to hear a white person
living in the UK speaking with that accent.
I have heard Neil Nunes speak and have heard his name. However, I am
bad at remembering names, so for me the words "black" and
"afro-caribbean" pointed unambiguously to the man Mike L was talking
Had Mike referred to him as Neil Nunes I would not have been sure
who he meant.
The simpler method would have been to give the name (Neil Nunes,
which David quoted early in the thread) - which was quoted in last year's
thread and which is, I believe, used to introduce the man on air.
Mind you, Mike also said elsethread "I have no problem at all with the guy's
accent, I think it's great." which makes it all the more incomprehensible to
me to raise the question of his colour or geographical origin and for Mike
to wonder if he (Mike) is a racist. (Actually, I believe he (Nunes) is
British (UK) born but was raised in Jamaica. If the only objection is the
way he says "Haydn" then why not post "There's an announcer on the BBC who
says Haiden instead of Hi-den for Hayden. Am I right to be irritated by
But that would not have identified the announcer.
I got the impression from Mike's original post that his irritation
at the mispronunciations was heightened by the contrast between them
and the pleasure to be gained from Nunes' "deep, fruity, resonant
By way of analogy, a bum note in a performance of a piece by Haydn
is likely to be more noticeable and irritating than one in a piece
of atonal music. (Perhaps I'm showing a preference here.)
Peter Duncanson, UK
- Prev by Date: Re: He knelt him at that word.
- Next by Date: Re: Present or the Present
- Previous by thread: Re: Black Radio 4 announcer
- Next by thread: Re: Black Radio 4 announcer