ON THE AIR
DinuNG the past fortnight three Cabinet Ministers and the Leader of the Opposition have come to the microphone. They provided an interesting study in broadcasting styles. Elsewhere in these pages Janus has dealt justly and decisively with Mr. Attlee's and Mr. Churchill's performances,- so contrasted in style, so similar in their lack of constructive content. Then, last week, we had Mr. Dalton's smooth suavity, with its faintly repellent touch of condescension, and Mr. Morrison's plain straightforwardness, which, T am inclined to think, was the most effective of all. Was there, perhaps, insufficient urgency about it, despite his warning that short- age of time was the country's greatest danger? I am not quite sure. The line of demarcation between the urgent and the alarmist is not too clearly defined, and scare-mongering is certainly not required.
* * * *
This sudden spate of political broadcasting raises questions of much `4 wider significance than the comparative merits of Mr. Attlee and Mr. Churchill as speakers at the microphone. Broadcasting ability is not yet considered an essential qualification for statesmanship, nor, in my view, is it desirable that it should become so. It is a matter of common observation that eloquence is by no means an invariable accompaniment of high-mindedness or administrative ability. (It is true, of course, that Parliamentary or platform eloquence—some- times known as the gift of the gab—is not the same thing as broad- casting ability, but for the purpose of my argument they are suffi- ciently nearly akin.) Statesmen of outstanding capacity and honesty of purpose have not infrequently been endowed with the eloquence of a stuffed frog. It is, of course, desirable that a Minister should be able to come to the microphone and to explain, clearly, concisely and, if possible, persuasively, the Government's policy and the measures it proposes to enact. In times of crisis it is desirable that he should be able to inspire the country as Mr. Churchill inspired us during the dark days of 1940. But it is easy to attach too much importance to such qualities as eloquence and broad- casting ability. Other qualities—clear-sightedness, courage, honesty, administrative ability, concern for the general welfare—are a great deal more important. Undue emphasis on the possession of broad- casting ability might easily result in the emergence of a specialised spell-binding type of politician, who has already emerged in the United States and whom we can well do without. Was it not Emerson—long before the days of broadcasting—who said that eloquent men were the curse of his country?
* * * *
We are up against the old difficulty to which I have previously referred : Those who know can't broadcast and those who can broad- cast don't know. One way out would be for the Government—or the political parties—to be represented on the air by speakers specially chosen for their broadcasting ability. This, in my view, would not be a satisfactory solution. When there is a weighty pronouncement to be made, affecting the well-being of millions, I for one would rather it were made by a responsible Minister, even though he spoke like a stuttering crow afflicted with tonsillitis, than by the honey-tongued Mr. Cicero Spellbinder, 0.B.E., who is merely a mouthpiece. In matters of statesmanship I vastly prefer responsible dullness to sparkling irresponsibility.
* * * *
" Saturday Night Theatre " atoned for its lapse into Romance the previous week with a wholly admirable performance of Will Shake- speare, Clemence Dane's most ingenious and dexterous "invention." The author was responsible for the radio adaptation—a first-rate piece of work, of which my only criticism is that the final scene between Shakespeare and the Queen seemed a little long drawn out. The cast was excellent throughout, its outstanding members being Fay Compton as Mary Fitton, Gladys Young as Queen Elizdbeth and Val Gielgud as Shakespeare.
* * * *
Twenty Questions continues to provide startling information on a variety of topics. Last week's best effort was the classification of bats—the kind that fly around at dusk, not the kind that Mr. Edrich handles so expertly—as insects. This was not merely a lapse on the part of the question-master, for he was supported by the producer, and no question arose about the correctness of the statement. Such an interesting discovery—as I assume it to be—seems to have escaped the notice of scientists, and I suggest that it would probably interest
Previous page
