Simon Schama cannot be faulted as a television presence. Although physically slight, his voice carries a resonance and an authority that encourages viewers to trust in what he says.
This style worked ideally in his HISTORY OF Britain series, but lets him down in the FACE OF Britain. His basic thesis is a straightforward one; by looking at the history of portraiture, we can not only understand something about the subjects, but the cultural and social attitudes they embody. Schama's five-part series is thematically structured around certain values associated with "Britishness" as commonly understood; in each episode he adopts a trans-historical approach to demonstrate how those values have altered over time, as well as remaining constant.
Some of his juxtapositions are highly suggestive - as, for example, when he contrasts the work of the African Caribbean artist Kenneth Armitage, who memorably chronicled the Notting Hill disturbances of the late 1950s, with the socially conscious artists of the eighteenth century such as Hogarth.
But more often than not each episode ends up saying much the same thing; that there are certain values associated with Britain and Britishness reinforced and challenged by artists over time. We are left to ask ourselves: "So what?" Perhaps if Schama had widened his focus to look at the ways in which viewers have responded to the works - apart from himself, that is - then we might have got a more acute sense of the social role of art to the health of society over time.
As it stands THE FACE OF Britain is a bit of a package-tour through a miscellaneous selection of British art and artists. A considerable disappointment.