The Dominion. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1933. CINEMA ENGLISH

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 35, 4 November 1933, Page 6

The Dominion. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1933. CINEMA ENGLISH

It is well known that cinema English has become a matter of considerable concern to American film producers and theatie manage s. A message during the week reported that the head of a leading producii? company had complained that the American public found it difficult to understand the “quaint English accent,. and he had come over to London to see what could be done about it. . English people’s view of American screen speech is not that it is difficult to understand—they rather enjoy the colloquiahsnis; with which a wealth of American fiction has made them bu' . tha * its intonation and pronunciation has come as somewhat of a shock to their ears. It is hardly too much to say that with the advent of the first talkies from Hollywood many screen stars who were regarded in English communities as popular idols lost their radiance overni *T‘ ’ The American producers, quick to see the effect of this new development on British audiences, imported English talent in greasing quantities, but they had still to reckon with that important and influential section of their clientele, the “hicks ’ as the rural P°P ulat^° f . " United States are familiarly designated by the city folks, lhey bridle at England’s English. , . Cinema English, and for that matter radio English, have become a problem which as far as can be seen will only be solved, by the processes of time. The period of the silent screen was a great opportunity for pantomimic art, which in most producing countries, and notably in America, was carried to a high degree of perfection. 1 Ins accounted for the universality of the appeal of any good film irrespective of its nationality. Pantomime, scenery, action and climax, were the sole artistic desiderata. The advent of the “talkie” materially changed the aspect of film production and multiplied the difficulties of both producers and showmen. A new dimension was introduced that upset a previous calculations and changed the basis of film marketing. It is now possible, of course, to produce a film in several languages, but such a compromise, especially when applied to a screen stoiy with strong national or provincial local colour and representative characters, is bad art. , ~ , - X 1 . If the problem is left to Time, what will probably happen is that both cinema and radio English between them may accomplish a gradual evolution and standardisation of spoken English. Dialects and provincialisms which exist or have developed in. all English-speaking communities, including America, may gradually disappear, as they have already disappeared from written English except in such cases where local colour and characterisation are desired. A speech by a cultured American, as it appears in cold print, looks and reads exactly like a speech by an equally cultured Englishman. The Anglo-Saxon connection is in this respect well-nigh perfect. But it would take generations for the influence of the cinema and the radio to accomplish the acceptance on both sides of the Atlantic of conventional standards for spoken English. In the meantime we must be prepared to suffer, in patience the present confusion of Anglo-Saxon pronunciations which gives us, for example, “boids,” “herds,” and “burrrds” respectively from American;, Englishmen and Scots when they are talking about birds. In this impending evolution there may be some surprising compromises. It might be agreed, for instance, that the Scots “murrderrerrr” might convey a much more descriptive and terrifying picture of an assassin than the English “merderer,” or the American “moiderer.” Human nature is like 80-Peep’s lost sheep, of whom it was said to her. consolingly: “Leave them alone, and they’ll all come home, wagging their tails behind them.” There is hope for reform in a policy of gradualness.