Broadcasting Service and Imported Artists

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 258, 28 July 1936, Page 11

Broadcasting Service and Imported Artists

Sir, —My previous letter has been used by “New Zealander” and Mr. L. D. Austin. as a trail for their red herrings. I did not suggest that the Government was at fault in seeking overseas for a director of broadcasting. On the contrary, I am inclined to believe there is ample evidence that we require an efficient tutor in the art of entertaining by radio. Possibly a first-class imported director would defy the stupid parochialism that lies behind this business of attempting to make radio stars out of indifferent local talent; and this remarkable policy of spending much money importing people whose records have been heard repeatedly and are always available for replaying. In reply to Mr. Austin I can only remark that had he been less anxious to give Miss Joyce a free, though no doubt well-merited, advertisement, he might not have ignored the fact that I was using her case merely as an illustration of an irritating policy adopted by the broadcasting people. It is not a question whether Miss Joyce or anyone else is a good, bad, or indifferent pianist. The point is that we as listeners have been made familiar with Miss or Mr. So-and-So’s work by records—and these presumably can be replayed if so desired. Doubtless Miss So-and-So’s admirers would welcome a concert tour. They could then see her, watch her play, and enjoy her personality. They will gain nothing of this, as listeners, by paying part of their licence fees for the privilege of having Miss So-and-So at the studio in person. Mr. Austin’s contention that pianoforte records “convey a most inadequate idea of her actual playing" may apply rightly to a concert, “flcsb-and-blood” performance, but is nonsense when compared with a broadcast performance. In the latter case, of the two, the recording is usually the better.—l am, etc., M.A.J. Wellington, July 24.