Educating evening

Press, 15 July 1980, Page 15

Educating evening

Sunday night television has become almost a succession of topical, educational, and generally interesting documentaries and discussions — presumably preparing the viewer for the rigours of the week ahead while reflecting on the disasters and demises of the week before.

From 5 p.m. on, beginning with lan Fraser’s .consistently excellent “Newsmakers,” on TV2, switching over to Bob Lowe’s consistently condescending “Open Pulpit” on TVI shortly afterwards the pace for the evening is set. The news, “World Watch,” David Attenborough’s fantastic “Life on Earth.” and, later, “Close-up” keep knowledge-seeking viewers switching from one channel to the other. The welcome news that “Newmakers” is to be shifted to Friday nights from now on — still not the prime time it deserves, but certainly a better time than early Sunday evening — will at least take some of the intensity out of Sunday night’s programme. lan Fraser’s latest effort on Sunday made the nowpopular comparison of the banning of “Death of a Princess” and the screening last week of “McPhail and Gadsby on Religion.” In the studio he had, in the red corner Mr T. D. Hutchins, who is taking the Boadcasting Corporation to court over its decision not to screen the controversial film. And, in the blue comer fighting for free enterprise and against freespeech, was a representative of the New

Zealand Chambers of Commerce.

The talking heads format is a difficult one to sustain interest on a television programme. The talking heads involved can easily get bogged down in boring trivia, or, more likely, they start shouting at each other, thereby making it very difficult to understand their respective points of view. lan Fraser, faced with two strongly opposed men, each wanting to argue his point, and each one butting in while the other was talking, managed to stay on top of the situation, He kept the argument flowing, stopped them shouting, and asked probing and pertinent questions at the right time.

He referred to Mr lan Cross’s incredible remark about how he could “more objectively look at a film without looking at it” and threw that and other equally significant commentsinto the debate to add fuel to the fire, but always managed to keep the pot simmering rather than boiling over. In the second half of his programme, lan Fraser introduced David McPhail, producer and star performer of “McPhail and Gadsby,” and pitted his wits against those of the

extremely articulate the Rev. Michael Jackson Campbell. The latter summed up the whole argument about the allegations of blasphemy and bad taste of “McPhail and Gadsby” when he started lecturing David McPhail on what he should and should not do on television: "It was just not up to the standard you are well able to achieve,” the Rev. Campbell said. David McPhail, looking suitably humble, admitted feeling disturbed about the programme because people had not found it funny. There lies the rub!

Bob Lowe’s "Open Pulpit.” conversely, tvas an example of how the “talking heads” format can fail miserablv on television.

He had invited three young, witty, highly intelligent debaters from the Oxford Union, who were recently touring New Zealand, on to his programme to discuss, it appeared, religion and the “glorious British Empire.”

It was a terrible waste of talent. The three debaters were bogged down in pompous questions from the condescending canon, such as “Can you sit through the funeral of Winston Churchill without feeling emotion?” And “Do vou go to church?” or “Do you think the trade unions have contributed to the downfall of Britain?” Good grief.

F— ■ . Review Felicity Price