TOPICS OF THE DAY

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 129, 27 November 1929, Page 10

TOPICS OF THE DAY

"The last of the great statesmen of the Nineteenth Century" and "among the greatest of them all." Such is Mr. Lloyd George's verdict on M. Clemenceau. - To talk of "the great statesmen of the Nineteenth Century" is to bring to the mind Bismarck. He forged the German Empire in the furnace of war, by first robbing Denmark, raiding Austria, and humbling France. (In the Austrian coup in the 'sixties, among his boy officers was Hindenburg, the ex-Monarchist President of the German Republic, but Hindenburg considers himself a soldier, and would decline to be a "statesman"). Bismarck used the conqueror's position at Versailles to formally launch the German Federation, and Clemenceau from the same Versailles administered the antidote fifty years later. Unlike Hindenburg, who in his war book (1919) still writes constantly of "my All-Highest War Lord," Bismarck could tell the truth about monarchs; he once said that he "had seen three Kings in their nakedness," and the result was not elevating. And the last of these three Kings was Hindenburg's AllHighest, he of Doom. Another saying of Bismarck was that if there had been no Austria-Hungary, "we" (that is, he) "would have had to invent one." The Dual Empire was indeed the shaky bridge that held together what was significantly called "Bismarck's Europe." Clemenceau waited half a century to kick down the whole fabric—and, though a septuagenarian, did it. He was a Montmartre Mayor when Bismarck and Hindenburg were in Paris fixing France's war indemnity. Bismarck was not to know that this young municipal officer was going to destroy the German army; but Hindenburg knows. His book is eloquent on the subject. Clemenceau fought death last week as he fought a premature peace in 1914-18. Hindenburg is the last great survival.

By the suddenness of his Budget and his tariff and financial changes, Mr. Theodore seems to have caught the Australian importers napping. One of their first impulses is to cancel orders, particularly in hosiery, but Nottingham has been advised to refuse to accept cancellation. "The goods are made, we must be paid" is the slogan that the English hosiery makers are recommended to adopt. Another impulse of holders of available stocks is to sell them at higher prices behind the new tariff, to meet losses that may be incurred on new arrivals—but "the Prime Minister has issued a warning" against-raising prices. So the importers appear to be between Satan and the deep sea, but they have side-stepped Satan before, and may do so again. Local manufacturers will, of course, do their best to take the goods that the gods, however unexpectedly, have provided. A Melbourne firm expects to make eight million pairs of stockings a year; it normally makes two million. If its good intention is realised, it will make in a year a pair of stockings for every living soul in Australia, including the aborigines—and a little more. Prices may be higher, but Australia will at any rate have the privilege of pulling up its own stockings. According to the manufacturers, the Australian stocking is one that will stand pulling up; but, in any case, the more stockings the more employment. "Say it with stockings" may become more popular than ever, price notwithstanding.

Comment is made in the Dunedin "Star" on the closing of three silent motion picture theatres in that city. This is a very notable event, but not one from which to draw hasty conclusions. As a rule, the more critical of theatre-goers appear to be of the opinion that a high-quality talking picture is more attractive than a high-quality silent picture; but the supply of high-quality talking pictures is.not yet sufficient, and any tendency to put on inferior sound films to fill a gap is fraught with danger to the whole product of the sound studios. The favourable impression formed of the best pictures by the more critical theatre-goers could easily be reversed by a lot of bad sound films (whether bad in themselves, or badly recorded, or badly reproduced).' The mind of the mass is not so easy to forecast as is the mind of the critical, yet it seems to be still quite possible that a popular reaction against sound pictures might set in if the picture producers concerned fail to be; jealous as to the quality of their product. At both the producing end, and at the exhibiting end, the problem of transition from silent to sound is attended with obvious difficulties, and the last word on it has not_ been said yet. A rapid rate of inventive improvement is working in the interests of sound, but is at the same time increasing the complexities of the individuals and firms concerned. Some little time ago small exhibitors in this country were advised not to incur the capital commitments of sound-reproducing plant unless they could write off the increased cost in increased profits, in twelve months. And many have been pondering-on how. to. make the

revenue fit the capital cost—or, alternatively, how to make the capital cost fit the revenue. The dearer may be the cheaper—or it may. not. * * ♦

I As to the remark made in Dunedin that the closed silent theatres were mostly^ using British films, this carries no implication that Britain cannot be _ successful in the producing of British talking pictures. Britain missed badly in the early stages of the picture and automobile industries—for which various excuses are offered—and she has now another chance in the great change-over which sound and voice have rendered necessary in the former. So great is the conversion that if British capital was alive to the opportunities it | might even now step out level with the others. On the art side Britain has great advantages. Her actors are better than American, and.their voices are incomparably better, there are two sorts of Americanisation issuing from the sound studios—an Americanisation as agreeable as one finds in the cultured type of American, and another sort that is tonally as well as grammatically vulgar. Picture producers sending out the latter are helping to make an opening for British talking pictures—if the producers thereof are capable of seizing the opportunity presented—but incidentally are damaging the reputation of sound pictures generally. Our own opinion is that the best will survive, and that the position Britain comes to occupy in the industry depends on her ability or inability to seize an excellent chance. Silent pictures will benefit by the mistakes of sound, and whether makers of the latter are determined to take a really large view of their business and mission is still a matter to be proved. Some authorities have condemned to death both the silent and the legitimate stage, but the sentences are premature.