SIR,—Mr. Peter Forster's praise of Huw Wheldon's Orson Welles interview
on Monitor should not go unquestioned.
It's all very well to say that this was 'one civilised person chatting to another,' but is this really what is wanted in a television interview? At the hands of, say, John Freeman the difference would have been remarkable. A highly articulate talker like Welles, kept on the rails by the very- much-to-the-point, questioning technique of Mr. Freeman. would have given good value.
As it was, the things one wanted to hear about were tantalisingly not dealt with. The gentlemanly chatter, liberally dosed with amicable 'Orsons' from Mr. Wheldon, stopped short of the point of serious interviewing. What were those three lost reels of The Magnificent A mbersons, for instance?
One felt that Welles himself was itching to tear loose from this half-strangled polite atmosphere. Only once was an opening clear. We saw a clip from Citizen Kane showing the press czar stalking the length of his Grand Central-size drawing-room, then
standing dwarfed on the enormous hearth as he says, 'Our home is here, Susan.' Diffidently, Huw suggested that this scene might be larger than life because the room was too big. Then came Welles's splendid retort, 'But the room was big!' Television can never have too much of this kind of thing.-- Yours faithfully,
4 Eccleston Square, SW1
GEORGE PERRY
Previous page
