Victory for Nosey Parker
L-
RLS D
From: J. R. Scott, Alan Williams. Alan Wood and Pete• Henry, Sir Halford Reddish. Val Gielgud, Peter Baker, MC, T. 0. L. Llewellin, John Taylor, Jerry Allen, Derek Marks, Robert M. Pringle. V. J. East, Josephine Clifford-Smith.
SIR,—One of the more fascinating aspects of last week's SPECTATOR was the contrast between Angus
Maude's article on the professions and Mrs White- house's letter in response to Stuart Hood's deroga- tory remarks about her in an earlier issue.
Mr Maude points out that one of the attributes of a profession is its power to enforce 'proper codes of ethics and practice,' resulting in the permanent en- richment and purification of the life of the nation, no doubt. Mrs Whitehouse's expressed concern is also with the enrichment and purification of the life of the nation, but she denies the credibility of any such achievements, it seems, to the professionals!
In fact, she maintains that if we leave matters to the professionals for much longer, the result will be a perpetuation of 'nihilistic, defeatist, amoral values.' Mr Maude warns against the dilution and degrada- tion of the professions forced upon them by 'mass society,' which is dragging them down to its level.
He warns further against the dangers of the loss of professional freedom and self-respect, and then denies the professional has any duty to society. Mrs Whitehouse implies that the representatives of society must control the professionals; Mr Maude is quite clear that in his view the professional has no respon- sibility to society, and refers to social duty as 'nauseous cant.'
If Mrs Whitehouse can explain what doctors, teachers and policemen have to do with the produc- ing of television programmes (does she suggest doc- tors and television producers in the police station and producers in the surgery?) and Mr Maude would ex- plain how society is apparently something other than the sum of the individuals who make it up—so that the professional has a duty to the one but not the other—I might be in a rather less confused and uncer- tain state of mind. Pity the wretched professional TV producer, who doesn't know whether to save his self- respect at all costs or give up his independent addic- tion to nihilism, defeatism, etc. in the interests of the mass society which Mrs Whitehouse lauds and Mr Maude denigrates.
Finally, is not Mrs Whitehouse trying to 'foist' her 'own particular philosophy' on me and every other watcher of television? I, and I suggest most people, do not want doctors, teachers or policemen or any- one else whose business it is none of, to dictate what I or my family shall or shall not watch on tele- vision. To that extent perhaps Mr Maude and Mr Reginald Bevins are with the great majority. At least I can still cling to that belief.
I. R. SCOTT
Winander, The Wold, Claverley, near Wolverhampton
Previous page
