It's just dawned on me that one of the reasons why the Geoff Hamilton era of GW worked so well was that he made several smaller self-contained gardens within Barnsdale, each with their own boundaries, seating areas, utility/composting areas etc, not just "garden rooms" within a single overall design
Didn't Toby Buckland and co. do something like that during his short tenure after Monty had his stroke? If my memory is serving me correctly, they acquired some land and set about making a bespoke garden especially for the programme. I recall Toby was quite upset (and vocal) when he was axed to allow Monty to return.
Clay soil - Cheshire/Derbyshire border. I play with plants and soil and sometimes it's successful
I know that I will get shouted down, but, here goes -
In my opinion the next presenter should not necessarily (note my terminology) be female or represent the diversity within this country.
The next main presenter should be precisely the best person for the job.
I get on my high horse when it is said that it's about time a woman or person of ethnic diversity, be the next choice for this or that job. If fairness is to be shown, then people who insist on this, should be left out of the selection process. They are automatically indicating that they wouldn't necessarily choose the ideal person - which is basically not doing the best that could be done.
Yes, the next person might be female, of ethnic minority, physically disabled, etc, but if they made choices in rotation, then sooner or later the presenter would be someone who didn't even have any interest or knowledge in gardening. They might even choose someone who had no garden - then how would the presenter be able to provide various options to show people such as ourselves, how things should be done?
Heck, if that were the basis of choosing someone for a position, then I might end up being prime minister, or a midwife, or dentist , or in another unsuitable position.
Can you imagine an epileptic as a dentist? Horrors!!😱😳
I agree, the best person for the job should get the job. Why rule out very good individuals (for any job) because of their skin colour or gender or age? Positive discrimination in favour of particular characteristics (other than ability, experience and knowledge for the job in question) is negative discrimination for equally suitable people who don't have those characteristics.
However, in this particular speculative example, of more than one main presenter for GW the BBC would be setting itself up for criticism if they were all the same colour/age/gender.
Doncaster, South Yorkshire. Soil type: sandy, well-drained
Then maybe the answer is to rotate the presenters (not literally, although sometimes that might be tempting). Err, isn't that what they do now, even if MD is still considered the main one.
I think it is great to vary the presenters, and to me, that style works well. You get to see different gardens, with differing types of soil/shade/aspect/etc.
If they choose someone with a small garden, then they really NEED to have other presenters. With MD, because his garden is large, it has enabled him to show so many different types of plant. It is a strength, rather than showing off. It provides variety.
So bored of reading people claiming that someone who doesn look like them may get a job and there's some strange possibility they won't be qualified for it. Obviously it will be someone with a deep interest in the subject of even have in depth academic studies in it. The fact that GW has been hosted by a man for half a century is surely not exactly ideal. I would welcome a shakeup on the status quo...hoping that when the time comes there will be less of a focus on bogus culture wars by rags like the Mail, Express, Telegraph and Sun.
From my perspective I think Frances would be ideal as she has the appropriate TV experience and background. But who knows what happens in five years from now, she may move on and someone else will come along. If she gets it, it will be the world's longest job interview 🤣
I agree, the best person for the job should get the job. Why rule out very good individuals (for any job) because of their skin colour or gender or age? Positive discrimination in favour of particular characteristics (other than ability, experience and knowledge for the job in question) is negative discrimination for equally suitable people who don't have those characteristics.
….
That says it all really … 👍
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
The next presenter should be a gay black disabled woman who is an expert gardener, then everyone will be happy, all boxes ticked.
. . . and be a non-English speaker (subtitled). That should encourage more people to watch, and perhaps, take up gardening.
I imagine that there won't be too many of those to choose from, but if they are the best, then yes.
However, that may turn a lot of people off, and Ch4 might start a new gardening programme with a Monty Don lookalike. But a lookalike won't be Monty Don, so Sky Arts will start one, with a mix of presenters - and succeed!! But you will have to pay extra to watch it!!
Posts
Didn't Toby Buckland and co. do something like that during his short tenure after Monty had his stroke? If my memory is serving me correctly, they acquired some land and set about making a bespoke garden especially for the programme. I recall Toby was quite upset (and vocal) when he was axed to allow Monty to return.
I play with plants and soil and sometimes it's successful
In my opinion the next presenter should not necessarily (note my terminology) be female or represent the diversity within this country.
The next main presenter should be precisely the best person for the job.
I get on my high horse when it is said that it's about time a woman or person of ethnic diversity, be the next choice for this or that job. If fairness is to be shown, then people who insist on this, should be left out of the selection process.
They are automatically indicating that they wouldn't necessarily choose the ideal person - which is basically not doing the best that could be done.
Yes, the next person might be female, of ethnic minority, physically disabled, etc, but if they made choices in rotation, then sooner or later the presenter would be someone who didn't even have any interest or knowledge in gardening. They might even choose someone who had no garden - then how would the presenter be able to provide various options to show people such as ourselves, how things should be done?
Heck, if that were the basis of choosing someone for a position, then I might end up being prime minister, or a midwife, or dentist , or in another unsuitable position.
Can you imagine an epileptic as a dentist?
Horrors!!😱😳
Err, isn't that what they do now, even if MD is still considered the main one.
I think it is great to vary the presenters, and to me, that style works well. You get to see different gardens, with differing types of soil/shade/aspect/etc.
If they choose someone with a small garden, then they really NEED to have other presenters. With MD, because his garden is large, it has enabled him to show so many different types of plant. It is a strength, rather than showing off. It provides variety.
From my perspective I think Frances would be ideal as she has the appropriate TV experience and background. But who knows what happens in five years from now, she may move on and someone else will come along. If she gets it, it will be the world's longest job interview 🤣
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
When you don't even know who's in the team
S.Yorkshire/Derbyshire border
I imagine that there won't be too many of those to choose from, but if they are the best, then yes.
However, that may turn a lot of people off, and Ch4 might start a new gardening programme with a Monty Don lookalike.
But a lookalike won't be Monty Don, so Sky Arts will start one, with a mix of presenters - and succeed!! But you will have to pay extra to watch it!!