Two worth hearing

Press, 14 November 1977, Page 17

Two worth hearing

By J

KEN COATES

Two people had something! worth while to say on South] Pacific Television on Friday night—Brian Priestley and the New Zealand-born author, Sylvia Ashton-Warner. But in both cases, the structure and production of their programmes did not exactly aid the emphasis which their messages needed. "News Stand” and “Kaleidoscope’ ’are scheduled on Friday nights, not the best of nights for concentrating on messages of importance. Brian Priestley’s most interesting comment was the complete lack of appeal—except perhaps for those with a kind of base curiosity—of “men only” magazines. His view was forcefully expressed and well presented, but to get to it one had to suffer a succession of extracts from newspaper leading articles, some writers of which for some reason choose the longest and dreariest way of expressing what they have to say. And to get to the fascinating and talented person, Sylvia Ashton-Warner, we had first to be treated to a performance by the Southern Ballet Company entitled “Homage.” Before all fans of ballet cry blatant and unfair discrimination, it is a fact that its appeal is not as wide as that of other art forms. And placing the Ashton-Wamer film last could well have cost

viewers who switched off before it began.

The film was the third of Endeavour Television’s series about three famous New Zealanders. Commissioned by the old N.Z.B.C. it appeared to have been gathering dust in a storage room for a long time.

One wonders how many other films commissioned by the old corporation are hidden away in the archives in Wellington. One film-maker

commented the other day that a film he made about Naseby in Central Otago had been lost, or at least that was what he had been told.

Although visually not particularly imaginative and lacking in clarity, the film nevertheless presented a woman who has constantly shunned publicity in her own country, but who is a creative artist of the highest order.

She was interviewed by another outspoken critic of established education patterns, Jack Shalcrass, of Wellington. While perhaps lacking the techniques and practised expertise of the skilled interviewer, he was able to establish a rapport in which the author and educator who has achieved world acclaim felt at ease.

It was a great pity that; South Pacific Television did: not see fit to promote the film about this highly creative woman so that more viewers could have seen it.

It is good to see Brian Priestley’s “News Stand” occupying an earlier slot and. viewers will look forward to this experienced practitioner taking advantage of the flexibility of his brief and the wider audience reached. His pertinent comments ■ about the utterly commercial motive behind the sale of! girlie magazines could per-! haps have been put into con-j text with an interview with some of the people involved in production and sale of the publications. Likewise, it would be interesting for viewers to hear from some of the people whose newspaper work is discussed by Mr Priestley on his programme.

The nature of television means that the people who carry the responsibility for making programmes or interviewing public figures are often made to account publicly for their actions. The people who control the print media and the world of publishing are not thrust into the limelight in the same way—yet the argument that they too should act in a responsible way in the public interest remains.