What are your thoughts on the series Abroad Again in Britain? Do you enjoy Jonathan Meades' robust style or do you find the programmes too irreverent?
Send us your thoughts using the form on the right and we will publish a selection below.
Edinburgh Castle
Meades, though unique, follows in a long line of knowledgeable presenters, the late Alec Clifton-Taylor springs immediately to mind; along with the late Arthur Negus. Meades does not waste the medium of television merely by narration and speaking into camera. Agree or disagree with what he says, at least he actually has a view and is not intimidated into mouthing politically correct dumbed-down twaddle, which far from strengthening our cultural heritage is in fact destroying it!
Tim Bailey, Ayr, Scotland
I watch these programmes particularly because I enjoy the presentation style. An hour-long programme about a castle could have been incredibly dull but Jonathan Meades manages to both inform and entertain at the same time. You don't get better TV than that!
Jonathan Shorland, London
Jonathan Meades obviously hates the Scots. Scotland has many good things about it but this programme basically mocked Scotland. Does Jonathan Meades think that England had no murders in its history? I will not be watching any more of this and wonder why I am paying my TV licence.
John Macleod, Skye, Scotland
Jonathan Meades - I could chew the cud with him forever - I wish he had more TV programmes
Susan Watt, Folkestone, Kent
It seems as though this chap dismisses Scotland and Scottishness as irrelevant. Also the conclusion that the castle was inhabited by, what seems to be implied, animals, is quite offensive and doesn't seem to be supported by any actual evidence. The programme (or rather Mr Meades) seems to be a great Victorian-style historian, espousing the superiority of the English in a gently mocking tone. I am actually English, so there is no bias.
Dan, Aberdeen
It has always seemed to me that real experts with anything of any value to say on his/her chosen subject do not need to patronise their audience. Jonathan Meades appeared to be on a presenter's ego trip appearing with Hitchcock type regularity in shots best left without his almost sinister presence. I would suggest that he sticks to writing rather than presenting, even if it is only to allow us time to make frequent references to the dictionary... a tome whose content he would appear to have studied with more adroitness than the background to the subject of the programme he was presenting.
BBC, please protect us from personalities whose style is snobbishly sensationalistic and allow us, the audience, and, most importantly, the subject of the programme the dignity of balanced and stimulating examination so that we can engage in it rather than respond to the antics of its pilot.
Ken Andrew, West Linton, Scotland
Cragside House
There have been a number of documentary treatments of Cragside and its creator on television recently. I must say, I enjoyed Meades' version most. What Meades manages to do in this, and most of his other work, is use his own physical presence to illustrate what is abstract in architecture. Together with the sometimes oblique cultural and musical references that pepper the commentary, Meades provides a thoughtful, insightful and better-rounded treatment of the psychology of architecture rather than simply its physical form. I do not find the humour (usually irony, it must be admitted) offensive or distracting but if some do, there are plenty of dry and flat treatises to choose from!
Philip Barton, Birkenhead
I found the programme, which could have been interesting, was spoilt by the lugubrious tone of the presenter, inappropriate and intrusive music and random shots of the presenter wandering about and distracting attention from people who were speaking. There were far too many shots of the dog. We have several presenters in the North East who would have done a far better job.
Jenny Lancaster, Durham
At last something stimulating on Saturday night TV! I wish my vocabulary was as extensive as his and I could articulate as well as he does what I was looking at!
Mr Holt, Aspley Guise, UK
I love Jonathan's style - he makes it so interesting, puts a different slant on buildings than 'normal' documentaries. Very enjoyable and easy to watch.
Gill Clapham, Blackpool
What a disappointment! A fascinating subject ruined by the smug and pretentious presenter, as well as ridiculous camera work. Why bother with such an idiot? If he thinks his subject matter is so far beneath him then use someone else.
Paul Boulden, near Kingsbridge, Devon
I had to turn off this programme, the contents of which were fascinating, because of very intrusive annoying 'background' music, which was totally unevocative of the buildings and surroundings being described. It really spoilt a very good programme.
Jean F, England
Portsmouth Dockyard
I was appalled to find that three-quarters of the programme was spent looking at close-ups of Jonathan Meades and listening to his patronising remarks. The parts of the programme narrated by Graham Hurley were excellent, as it showed the places he was talking about without giving a close up of his face in every picture. He also looked upon the dockyard in a positive way, telling us about the history instead of constantly criticising the architecture, as Jonathan Meades did. I have nothing against programmes on architecture, in fact I am thinking of becoming an architect when I leave school, but I hope I do not end up being as intolerant as Jonathan Meades.
Catherine Langham, Gloucestershire
It seems that some of your contributors have not seen any of Meades previous series - this is how he is, take it or leave it. Meades doesn't present sycophantic and low brow 'celebrations' - there is plenty of that type of television around and I am thankful that the BBC have the courage to put out slightly more thought-provoking series such as this.
Matt M, Leeds
Has that man opened the dictionary and decided to use every big word that is in there? It would have been a really good programme if I could understand what he was on about. I ended up just looking at the pictures and not listening to what he said.
Edana Wilkie, Kirkcaldy, Fife
Brighton Pavilion
Another excellent series from Jonathan Meades.
Christian Malim, Falmouth, Cornwall
Gorgeous, intelligent, charming, funny, acidic, beautifully shot, and delightfully sharp TV.
Simon, Brighton
Salisbury Cathedral
A good programme ruined by completely ill-disciplined posturing by Jonathan at the end. Would a programme about a historic mosque in Cairo end with a diatribe on the lines of, "Of course none of this has anything to do with God, if one existed etc"? Why be gratuitously and subjectively offensive to viewers of any faith?
Martin Gorick, Stratford-on-Avon
I had looked forward to a programme about Salisbury Cathedral but I was horrified to find that it was just a vehicle for Jonathan Meades to criticise belief in God and religion. I suggest that if he wants to do that he should try to use the architecture of a different religion where people may not take it so good naturedly when he calls their beliefs into question.
Margaret Summers, Derby
Having been to school in Salisbury and knowing the beautiful Cathedral well, I was looking forward to the programme. Imagine my disappointment when what promised to be an interesting and informative programme was completely ruined by the inclusion of utterly pointless and banal pop music. Whatever possessed you? Did you mistakenly think that this might give a more popular appeal to the younger viewer? I cannot say that Jonathan Meades' presentation was particularly attractive either, being narrated in a somewhat sarcastic style and world-weary manner, completely unsympathetic to the subject. Marks out of ten, four.
Mrs M Best, New Malden, Surrey
I've just been watching Jonathan Meades' documentary on Salisbury Cathedral with the sound turned right down: such an improvement.
Andrew Baker-Munton, Leicester
