INITIAL DEBATE

Southland Times, Issue 21072, 2 May 1930, Page 11

INITIAL DEBATE

THE INVERCARGILL SOCIETY.

SOME EXCELLENT SPEECHES.

The first debate of the recently-formed Invercargill Debating Society was held last night in St. John’s Hall, where a small but enthusiastic audience was present. The listeners were treated to some excellent debating, and an enjoyable evening was spent. Mr S. M. Macalister was in the chair, while Mr J. R, Haig, of Wild Bush, acted as judge. The subject was: “That the American talkie film should be excluded from New Zealand,” and the speakers were as follows: Affirmative—Messrs M. Macdonald (leader), T. V. Mahoney and H. K. Carswell. Negative—Messrs J. C. Prain (leader), E. H. J. Preston and A. J. Deaker. The chairman, in his opening remarks, said that the society was formed through the efforts of the younger members of the community who desired an opportunity of practising public speaking. He stressed the fact that the absence of facilities in this direction was a serious drawback and briefly outlined the advantages of platform delivery. The leading speaker for the affirmative, Mr M. M. Macdonald, opened by referring to the large following the talkies boasted. He drew comparisons between the American film and the British efforts and then between the talkies and the silent pictures. Practically no British films were shown in New Zealand owing to the lack of the proper installations, the Americans having a monopoly in this direction. He maintained that the country was better served by the silent film owing to the faulty American purity of diction. The most drastic element of the American talkies was undoubtedly the amount of slang and accent being absorbed by children; and not only by them, but by their parents. Accordingly, the adverse effect on the next generation might well be wagereel. The speaker continued to refer to back-stage scenes, and quoted the Australian censors’ trenchant criticism of the American talkies. He stressed the unemployment of musicians following the introduction of “canned music. “There is no mystery and beauty in the talkies such as one enjoys in the silent films,” he emphasized. Mr J. C. Prain, leader of the negative, contended that the talkies were the choice of the public, and as such, had come, to stay. His argument was three-fold. In the first place he referred to the entertainment value, stressing the fact that although some of the earlier talkies had been weak, it was the same case with the silent pictures in their initial stages and the improvement to the talkies must come likewise. Secondly, the educational value could not be disputed as shown by the latest efforts of the Hollywood producers who were combining to give the public pictures of high educational value. Thirdly, the economic aspect could not be overestimated. The affirmative would probably argue that a considerable sum of money derived from . the American talkies was sent out of the ' country, but the Australian Royal Commission had found that 86 per cent of such ; receipts spent in the industry was left in j the country. “The people demand the j best and at the present time the American ] talkies are the best and to exclude them , would be a retrogressive step,” Mr Prain submitted. ;

Mr T. V. Mahoney (affirmative) who followed, argued that large audiences attended the talkies to-day simply because of the novelty of the entertainment. It was the same position when the silent films first held sway. “A local manager has informed me'that, as yet, no English talkie has been shown in this city solely because such talkies cannot be shown on the West-ern-Electric systems,” he said. The speaker quoted statistics to support his contention that of the £1,125,000 spent annually by picture-goers in this dominion, 40 per cent of that amount went to America without bearing taxation at all. Mr E. H. J. Preston (negative) dealt exhaustively with the subject, which he treatled from an international relationship point of view; secondly, insofar as it affected the liberty of the subject and lastly, as to the standard by which the “talkies” were judged. He emphasized that it was extremely important that our relations should be friendly between the nations and that too narrow a view should not be taken. Mr H. K. Carswell (affirmative) gave a good speech in humorous vein while Mr A. J. Deaker (negative) who followed, delivered a forceful argument in support of his contention that the evil effects of the American talkies were over-emphasized. After both leaders had replied, a vote was taken, the majority favouring the negative viewpoint. Mr Macalister, when calling upon the judge to give his criticism of the various 6

speakers, expressed the pleasure of the members of the society in being fortunate enough to secure Mr Haig’s attendance in the capacity of judge; Tor some 20 years or more, Mr Haig had peen interested in debating and any advice he could give would undoubtedly prove invaluable. Mr Haig thanked the society for inviting him to act as judge. JVhen he had read in the newspapers about the debate to take place that evening, he said it took him back to the old davs when Mr Macalister and he used to debate in the Allen Hall. “It has been a big surprise for me to attend such a promising initial debate where I have found the speakers so good. The task of determining the best has been a difficult one,” he said. The judge then stressed the necessity for humour and adequate gesture in debating and pave some helpful advice generally in the matter of public speaking. Mr Haig considered that Mr Macdonald had a great future before him as a debater. His delivery was splendid and his reply excellent. Mr Mahoney opened quite well, but he had spent too much time in statistics. He should also cultivate humour to a greater extent. Mr Carswell was a very promising speaker who spoke with assurance. Mr Prain spoke well and, especially in his reply, scored heavily with several bright points. Mr Preston nossessed a quiet, convincing. manner of speaking, his matter had been well thought out and the construction of his speech good. He should improve greatly a§ the season progressed. Mr Deaker had made the best speech of the evening, it being excellent in matter, delivery, sense of humour and even in gesture. A hearty vote of thanks to Mr Haig for his instructive remarks was moved by Mr Macdonald and carried unanimously. The next debate of the societv will take place on May 15, when the subject will be: —“That compulsory military service in New Zealand should be abolished.” , I

The speakers chosen are as follows: Affirmative —Messrs C. A. Scott (lender), S. Smith and R. J. Wilkes. Negative— Messrs I. O. Manson (leader), J. C. Price and E. C. Tapley.