By David Brown
Children of the 1980s will feel a rush of nostalgia as series seven and eight of BBC drama Grange Hill are released on DVD – and you could win a copy, along with series five and six and four other classic box sets (scroll down for how to enter our prize draw). Gonch is scheming, lovebirds Zammo and Jackie hit a rough patch, while Mr Bronson’s wig fuels classroom gossip. Ah, they don’t make them like they used to… But maybe they should? We asked Grange Hill creator Phil Redmond whether the doors of his school should reopen for a new generation…
Could Grange Hill be revived now? Yes, it could have fallen into Ofsted special measures and be threatened with closure. But a few of the old characters, who are now parents, or even grandparents, come together to save it as a “community school”. Zammo could lead the campaign, remembering how his friends at school brought him back from the brink.
If Grange Hill were to return, what subjects would it tackle? Knife crime? Gang violence? Homophobia? Paedophilia? All of them, plus Extinction Rebellion and the cult of Greta Thunberg. But underscoring them would be the root causes – like self-worth, bullying, loneliness and isolation. Now, though, they’d be illustrated through the pressures of social media.
Would Grange Hill make an impact today when kids’ TV is far more fractured? The impact would be even greater today. The “fractured audience” is just a distraction. What people mean is that technology has changed, so there’s no longer any need to make an “appointment to view”. But the BBC still has the same reach – it’s just spread over a number of platforms. And it’s the same challenge we faced in 1978. Back then, I was told that kids wouldn’t watch a half-hour programme. Well, they did. All that was necessary was to make something with which they could connect. So could you imagine the impact if Grange Hill was showcased on BBC1, then iPlayer, then social media? It would be awesome and totally woke!
Should BBC1 restore children’s TV? CBBC is now so well established, but I still feel the BBC made a strategic mistake in overlooking those aged 9—16 when it revamped the schedules a few years ago. That age group — the rites-of-passage audience — isn’t well served by TV. Part of Grange Hill’s success was, I still believe, because it was on BBC1. Isn’t that what our main public service provider should be for? To reach those others can’t?
Should there be more dramas for kids with working-class characters? Of course, due to the simple fact that, statistically, there are more working-class kids. Yet Grange Hill also succeeded because it focused on the one thing all kids have in common: going to school. I’ve lost count of the number of Old Etonian politicians who have told me that Grange Hill was their favourite programme at school.
What was its big appeal? It spoke to them of their world, in their language (minus the swearing) and it always tried to make kids aware that they weren’t alone. And from day one, it reversed the tradition of kids being seen merely as appendages to adults. Its first director, Colin Cant, had the brilliant idea of bringing the camera down to an 11-year-old’s eye level. So, in every sense, the world was viewed through their eyes.
Will the BBC still be making TV for children in a decade’s time? There’s no reason why not, but it’ll probably be in partnership with others, brokering the reputation of the BBC with educational and health funders or respected publishers. The BBC is still the showcase for public service television – and providing good content for children, especially those rites-of-passage touchstones, should be a primary aim. We need to ght to protect the BBC as our primary public service broadcaster.
Answer the question below for your chance to win!
from Radio Times https://ift.tt/2pat1jh
