If you could call them that,who do you consider to be the best and worst at this job?.....for me its. Best-Adam Hart Davies-Funny,knowledgable and unbiased. Worst-Crispin Swayne-Great Battles has to be the worst series I've ever had the misfortune to watch Robert Hardy is also a fine presenter/military and social historian.
I think that the worst I've seen, is Nick Knowles' half-hour "history" programmes.
Not only are they too brief and shallow in detail and empty in content, but his 'style' is irritating and his shows are far too 'nudge nudge' and flippant in humour & type.
Jon Romer was indeed very good; marvellous voice & passion for the subject -"Seven Wonders" sticks in the mind. Michael Wood is another favourite, and Neil Oliver - and Simon Schama is wonderfully erudite & witty, despite his characteristic head-movements being distracting! I'd love to see more "archive" presentations - seeing a brief clip of Mortimer Wheeler recently was fascinating.
Originally posted by ironaxe: Michael Wood - passionate, dedicated and inspiring.
Tony Robinson - Keen 'amateur', presents with enthusiasm & in layman's speak.
Terry Jones - Passionate, informal and humourous.
Ironaxe, Agree completely. All 3 are different and yet in their own way very watchable. I also like Richard Holmes the (mainly) military historian. His series of great battles were very informative. His style is very enthusiastic and reminds me very much of some of the history lecturers I had at university. And Tristan Hunt is very good too.
As for the worst I'd say Starkey is in a league of his own here. Self-obsessive and biased. I find Simon Schama not quite as bad although his mannerisms grate afer a while.
Great that there is so much history on TV nowadays but too much for me is light - programmes preteding to be erudite. Either be erudite (Wood, Holmes, Hunt) or be light-hearted yet informative (Robinson, Jones).
And finally, I love Time Team. Worth watching for Mick Aston's gravity defying hair, striped jumper that he's worn since series 1 and Phil Harding's hat and west country accent. Nothing better to watch on a cold winter's evening seeing them enjoying themselves in the British summer. My fantasy job.
I'm quite a fan of Richard Holmes, though I've also enjoyed the relatively limited amount that Tom Asbridge has done - hoping there's going to be more to come from him, though I know he's busy writing at the moment.
Favs definetly Schama and Wood, though I confess that despite knowing he doesn't write all his own material, I do find Cruikshank's enthusiam infectious! Especially in his recent history of Modernism.
Starkey is pretty annoying and I hated his early espisodes of Monarchy, though his episodes on the War of Roses and Henry VIII were very intersting and enlightening.
Terry Jones and Terry Robinson sometimes good but often too light.
I quite like Cruikshank as a presenter. What irritates me enormously is his dress sense, its so horribly contrived that it detracts from what he has to say. Its as though he copied everything from "The Modern Archeaologist" special fashion supplement circa 1925. The canvas and ever so slightly tatty fedora, the khaki chinos, the blue oxford cotton shirt, the arabic style scarf, the dusty brown boots, the black leather notebook. Its suck a cliche of of type I don't know whether that's actually him or his idea of what he should look like.
Generally, I would agree with the lines being taken here with a few exceptions. Starkey is a long way up his own backside, but at least he does not have an agenda and is always hilarious on women's physical appearance - Schama is just awful for agendas and plummy pomposity (that prog on the Enlightenment and Nap wars was just agenda driven drivel). Nussbacher and his sidekick Urban on Time Commanders were just showing themselves up as nepotistic ignoramuses.
Wood is especially good at painting a picture using period quotes. David Rohl is not a natural but presented his complex work very well on A Test of Time.
There are some really talented academics out there who should do more tv to widen their teaching work. I could name several who are tailor made for Television. Andrew Merrills, Colin Adams, Jonathan Prag, Melanie and Kate Giles, Simon James, David Mattingly and Neil Christie would all make good TV historians.
The ones that really grate on me are those with little academic credibility, filled with a desire for self aggrandizement, seemingly driven by a desire for cash rewards for their efforts and with no interest in furthering serious academic research and study, they fill thier days between appearances on Richard and Judy by writing unpleasent reviews about other peoples academic work in popular magazines.
