Zivilisation

I was a young man in my impressionable early-20s, when Kenneth Clark's "Civilisation" made its appearance on American television. I recall, at the time, thinking what ambition to entitle a program so. Public Broadcasting had not been around for many years, and I expected a stodgy, pompous, supercilious approach to the subject of art and civilization, especially as it was coming from Britain. Surely, this was a program for the elite, the snobs of the art world, the aristocrats of Europe who had access to such treasures. Kenneth Clark truly changed those first impressions, presenting in a gentle, understandable way some of the great treasures of the human species. These pieces were no longer remote, mysterious objects stuffed away in some dusty museum or moldering palace. He clearly taught about each of his choices, seeming to enjoy the opportunity to pass on to the viewer his love and admiration for these works and their meaning, as they related to the modern world and to the world long past in which they were created. He was humorous and wise, and the photography was stunning. I immediately changed my major in college to art history and, although I never became wealthy from the education, I have always appreciated what I did learn, beginning with the inspiration provided by Kenneth Clark and "Civilisation." Mr. Clark became one of those people with whom I wish I could have spent an afternoon, just listening. I haven't seen the program in many years, though it was re-run often after its first showing. I would like to see this back on television, or on DVD. I do believe it was the inspiration for many similar, and more famous programs to follow and was part of that exceptional time in television when the UK sent us its best - "Civilisation", "The First Churchills", "The Six Wives of Henry VIII", "Elizabeth R", and "I, Claudius."

If "Civilisation" ever reappears, do yourself a favor. Sit back in an easy chair, tone down the distractions, have a good hot coffee, and enjoy the story of your past. It's shared by all of us, and Kenneth Clark will introduce you to yourself.

The upside of paternalism, if you like. They couldn't make Civilisation (1969) today.

I know, I know. They tried. 'Civilisations' (cos there's been more than one, you know). Rightly chewed-up, even by the BBC's own arts critic, as a project without any sense of vision or purpose, the worthless and unnecessary sequel is destined for the scrapheap. The original, commissioned by that hero of BBC TV, Sir David Attenborough, is an immortal product of the Beeb at her most ambitious. The most extraordinary buildings and works of engineering, the most beautiful interiors and works of decorative art, the greatest achievements in music and sculpture, painting, bronze casting, and more besides; and all to show off the new medium of colour television.

And if Attenborough is a hero then so is the series writer-presenter, Kenneth Clark. The director of the National Gallery, an art historian of immense experience and erudition, and actually one of the most experienced culture broadcasters on the still developing medium of televisual broadcasting. Civilisation is a 13-part lecture series, of a kind, in which Clark endeavours to answer one question: what is civilisation? He prefers to answer it through the medium of art, his specialty, because it is less doubtful than the words of a smarmy politician or a propagandist historian. His journey takes him around Europe and across the Atlantic to the USA. He, and the recording team, are showing things to the viewer that they might never have known existed, much less had the chance to see in person.

Clark was an immense figure in the art world. He speaks with a confidence born of deep consideration of art and literature, over decades of study and writing. Write so you learn to think, talk so you learn to speak. Those are the words of Prof. Jordan Peterson. Alternatively, immerse yourself in the eloquence of great spirits such as Clark (and Peterson, naturally). For Clark's presentation is remarkable for its eloquence, as well as one or two unusual pronunciations (ca-PIT-alism, not CAP-italism; i-ron, not i-yun, as we tend to say 'iron' today). He also provides a model of how to be on camera without stealing focus from the art and architecture which is intended to be the central attraction.

The decades have passed and there have been many series on TV about art and history from different periods. None can match, few have ever attempted, the grand sweep of Clark's vision (vision is the apt word), nor his eloquent use of language, engagement without ego, or at times contained emotion. Most tv historians subsequent to Clark merely allow the producers to stroke their egos, so they toss their hair, make worthless shots looking out at vistas or sunsets, and talk as simplistically as possible so as not to threaten the dull minds with knowledge or inspiration. Or we get vapid travelogues, replete with segments on local cuisine and clowning. Clark's series is always replete with something others rarely communicate: passion. A passionate engagement with things he considered holy.

I watch whole episodes, or just bits of them, again and again, and over the decades I've come to love all the episodes, rather than having favourites. The more depressed and disgusted I become, soaking my attention in the tabloid vulgarity and sheer stupidity that teems in Socialmedia Land, the more urgently I need Civilisation, the series and what it stands for.

You're not educated if you have not seen this TV series.

Yes opiniated, yes patrician, but also an enlightening, exceptional documentary series. Nothing else I've seen on the BBC can match it (though I enjoyed The Ascent of Man very much). A profoundly intelligent look at Western 'Art' History covering music, painting, architecture, sculpture, writing (poetry, drama, prose, philosophy) and celebrating the astonishing achievements of individuals. "There they are, you can't dismiss them". Quite.

First broadcast in 1969,Civilization was produced not only to showcase the new medium of color television but also to reassure a then turbulent society of its established roots.

Before viewing Civilization I had never heard of Kenneth Clark, or K Clark as he was known to his contemporaries. At first glance he appears to be the product of a stodgy old order, a stereotypical brown flannel suit poised very uneasily in the Age of Aquarius. However his soft demeanor, articulate observations and frank but reasonable opinions quickly become very endearing qualities. I soon found myself very disappointed I had never met the man, or at least lived through his era.

I can say with confidence that if you seriously enjoy history, particularly the European variety, you will enjoy Civilization. Even if you don't, the stunning and intimate portrayal of 1500 years of art may still be captivating enough to hold your attention. This program is unlike anything broadcast in the post-MTV era, and it sets a standard of culture and erudition that puts networks which should know better, like the History Channel, to shame.

There have been many fine video lecture series by prominent cultural figures, from Joseph Campbell to Robert Hughes, but for me, the finest is still the first, Kenneth Clark's landmark, "Civilization, A Personal View". The sub-title is important, for Clark's survey of western civilization through its art and architecture is certainly opinionated. And this gives the series a wonderful intimacy that previous televised surveys never approached.

Not only is there a wealth of information and insight in this beautiful production, but there is Kenneth Clark himself. A scholar of culture and art, admirer of Ruskin and student of Bernard Berenson, he was director of the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford and the National Galley in London, as well as pioneering arts commentator for radio and television in the UK. Kenneth, Lord Clark, raised to the peerage for his achievements, is perhaps the greatest impresario of art of the 20th century.

"Civilization, a Personal View" has been criticized by some art critics as being a bit "facile". I disagree. Clark's argumentation is always reasoned, never arbitrary. It certainly is facile for pop commentators to repeat the old tourist-pleasing but phony assertion that Michelangelo designed and built St. Peter's dome. It is Clark who points out that St. Peter's dome is the work of Giacomo della Porta, not Michelangelo. Is it facile for Clark to confess that when he was young he scorned Frans Hals out of snobbery, but later, "as I grew older," began to appreciate Hals's "convivial" figures? Facile indeed. Everything Clark says carries weight.

Aside from questions about Clark's personal views - he ends Civilization at the beginning of the modern era, not because he ran out of film but because he didn't care for modernism - it cannot be denied that he delivers them in such a lucid, congenial and engaging manner, that only the pedantic and churlish could fail to be delighted with a dapper, eloquent, beautifully spoken gentleman's tour through western history. Where else do pronunciations like caPITalism and usages such as "lie of the land" sound so wonderful than from the lips of this erudite Scotsman?

"And please allow me two minute's digression on the subject of tulips." I love it!

Clark's series is by far the best televised course in Western Civilization ever created. I doubt if it will ever be surpassed. There are two men I dearly miss having met before they died - Joseph Campbell and Kenneth Clark. Upon meeting Clark in "Civilization, a Personal View," I think you'll understand why.