Report by C. E. Vulliamy

I set this competition with a few misgivings, fearing that a Rhadamanthine decision would not be a very congenial exercise. But the task of reading the entries, though occasionally disappoint- ing, has been the cause of many chuckles and of much delight. The study of our capacity, and our reasons, for damning our fellows must always be entertaining.

Still, I must allow that I had hoped for something more jubilantly infernal, something which might have recalled (however faintly) the malice and wit of Quevedo. Here, I thought, was a great opportunity for honest and 'honourable haters, the chance of judging and of condemning some of those odious creatures who, to all right-minded people. would appear eminently worthy of punishment. It is true that my choice of candidates for damnation may have implied levity, though it certainly included some of the worst of our social plagues. No doubt it 'would have been an easy matter to have bundled in a civil servant, a politician, a soldier and a newspaper boss ; but this might have resulted in a number of dangerous identifications, and I thought it wiser to restrict myself to the more common types of the damnable.

Some of the entries were not adequately ruthless. Others were too decorous, emphasising rather the justice of Rhadamanthus than the fearful resources at his command. Three or four blithely exceeded the word-limit. One was not wholly legible: but let me hasten to add that he would not halie won a prize anyhow. And several, otherwise good, failed because they did not give Rhada- manthus a voice and a style of his own, and wrote in a manner too obviously reminiscent of the Old Bailey. Only one or two thought of inventing • a personal name for the accused—a strange neglect of opportunity.

The choice of those to be convicted was interesting. I anticipated some frolicsome ribaldry at the expense of the charwoman, but the entrants were more concerned with damning the book-reviewers. The popular soprano (whose noxious diffusion by radio has become a major pestilence) was not always treated with adequate fury, though I am glad to observe that she has inspired a winner. Female entrants represented only a small percentage of the whole, and there was only one clergyman.

4fiseees6

Way

Navy

Pure Navy Cut of Pre-War quail!),

GODFREY PHILLIPS LT

MANUFACTURERS sad GUARANTORS

I OZ. AIRTIGHT TIN 8/10 I OZ. FOILED PACKET 4/5

Also ready rubbed Among those who deserve to be placed are Mr. Lionel Jackson, whose Rhadamanthus addresses the sporting bore in the octosyllabic lines of Hudibras, and Mr. Robert Waterhouse, who refuses to condemn the anonymous reviewer and obliquely censures the little games of the literary exhibitionist. But Mr. Waterhouse overlooks the fact that the terms of the competition includes a sentence. A very ingenious entry came from Mr. Robert Parker, who also wrote in Hudibrastic verse (on the reviewer), but was metrically unstable and exceeded the word-limit. This is a pity, because his lines were amusing, and " existential garret " is a happy phrase. Not less ingenious but more sharply pointed is. Mr. Kennard Davis's con- demnation of the bore, who is to be " confined for an indeterminate period to the precincts of the Athenaeum . . . and may the gods have mercy upon your soul." And there is Mr. G. J. Milne, who sentences the bore to " stay in a real Hell Bunker heaving coal with a shovel instead of a spoon " (which is, I presume, an instru- ment used in golf). Mr. J. F. Powell's book-reviewer who finished as " a nonagenarian in an unlabelled coffin " was a likely runner.

I lingered long over the entry of Mr. Robert Hartman. I must also commend Mr. C. B. Ricks, of King Alfred's School, for a neat and erudite little speech (on the bore) and Mr. H. de B. Saunders for genuine ferocity (on the film-producer) ; while Mr. D. C. H. Hirst is to be congratulated upon a most ingenious parody of legal procedure.

Although a high degree of literary excellence was not displayed in this competition, I recommend the division of the prize: £3 to Miss Jane Meiklejohn and £2 to Mr. W. E. Green, the first for damning a soprano and the second for damning a film-producer.

FIRST PRIZE

(MISS JANE MEIKLEJOHN)

PRISONER, you are charged with exploiting the ignorance and bad taste of the British public. The evidence shows that you were a promising singer when young, and might have become an excellent one. But you abandoned your training and rushed into broadcasting. To fill the gaps in variety programmes, you sang easy, familiar and sentimental songs to the most undiscriminating audience in England, and you sang them abominably. You never hit a note in the middle ; your high notes were a shriek and your long notes a wobble ; your consonants, except S, were soundless and your vowels dreadful. Your audience mistook your absence of technique for simplicity and sincerity, and your bad choice of songs they attributed to a genuine desire to please them ; so they took you to their great soft hearts.—I find the charge proved, and sentence you to take part in an Ensa tour of Hades. I see that, during your Ensa tour on Earth, you performed Gounod's "Ave Maria" sixty- four times, and " Because" seventy-eight times. The local bye-laws fortunately prevent your singing " Me Maria " here ; but a limited programme has the desired effect on the damned, and you shall sing "Because " eternally.

SECOND PRIZE

(MR. W. E. GREEN) IT is claimed for the prisoner that he brought colour and gaiety into the lives of thousands otherwise doomed to dull monotony: against this, that without opiates such as he dispensed, they would have been inclined to some recreation a little less unworthy of the heirs of Athens. Admit- tedly, be has kept the young from the streets for a brief hour while a strip of celluloid flickered before a lantern ; but has he not-discharged them again into streets made trebly dangerous by the false allure of his shadow world 7—This much is true. Minds have been stultified through his agency ; minds that alight have unfolded to all the grace and wisdom that is man's heritage. Nevertheless, if you consider that he erred under the compulsion of an urge towards self-expression, some blind groping after truth, you will judge him guiltless. If, on the other hand, you find that he acted solely for the love of gain, he shall be condemned.. . . Prisoner at the bar, you are sentenced by this court to witness an endless repetition of your film "floozies Afloat " in Hideous Polychrome, from now until the end of time.'... Okay, Bud, give him the works I Spectator Competition No. 12

Set by Janus

According to one of Shakespeare's characters "The Prince of Darkness is a gentleman." 'Discuss in 200 words his more con- spicuously gentlemanly qualities. The usual prize or prizes will be awarded.

Entries must be addressed to the Spectator, 99 Gower Street, London, W.C.1, in envelopes marked " Competition," and must be received not later than March 31st. Results will be published in the Spectator of April 7th.