POSSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION

Southland Times, Issue 23381, 13 December 1937, Page 10

POSSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION

WORK OF INVENTORS STANDING IN COMMUNITY Marconi brought all the sounds of the world into the parlours of the world, and our present inventors will be remembered with him as the men who brought the sights. But the second thought must be; Do we want them? Are the inventors planetary benefactors or cosmic nuisances? I (writes A. n . Herbert, in The Listener) have every reason to be prejudiced against them. For it must be a shock to see oneself for the first time both filmed and “televised” in a single operation. | We grow hardened to the sight of our own faces, and by degrees I think we almost come to see ourselves as others see us—at least, in repose. But no man hears his own voice as others hear it; and, I can assure you, it is a horrid sound. Nor do we ever see ourselves in motion (unless we are one of those politicians who are reported to rehearse their speeches before a looking glass). I see now that I must really dig out that upper denture and try to wear it regularly—at least, f° r oratory. I owe this to the inventors. It is very good for one to see and hear oneself, however frightful one is; indeed, the more frightful the better, and I think that all public speakers—perhaps all citizens —ought to suffer it. What troubles me is the thought of the plain singer and the nervous lecturer or speaker. The decent darkness of the wireless has been a godsend to them. But, once vision is available, I suppose we shall all greedily insist upon vision. The talk without the talker will be considered dull; Plain Jane and Shy Simon and Toothless Tom will be driven on the market. Beauty will regain her unfair advantage; and the speaker with a film face or “a way with him” will oust unhandsome intellect or unshaven learning. This I believe to be a real possibility, for many an unskilled or timid speaker who can escape misfortune on the air, or even face to face with a charitable audience, will excite nothing but impolite laughter on the screen.. And then it is bad enough to have to worry about that denture; but if one must be “made up” and lipsticked every time one delivers a message to the nation, public life will become intolerable. This latest miracle fills me with odd, inconsequent thoughts. For example, will it be possible, I wonder, to switch off the sound and retain the sight? This would enhance the wicked satisfaction of cutting off what one dislikes. One could continue to gaze at • the golden girl who will sing sharp without Raving to listen to her. And if we must keep “two sets in every home’ one could have Hitler mouthing in one corner of the drawing room and Stalin grimacing in another—and not a sound from either. SPEECHES AND FACES

But I wonder next whether the great men will consent to have their harangues accompanied by their faces in the home. Tempting, politically; but dangerous. Most of them have dentures, or ought to have. For set orations perhaps the technique of the newsreel could be employed; and when the hero spoke of “the dawn” or “golden harvest” an appropriate picture could replace his countenance. But that, too, would be dangerous, because of the operator’s power of selection. The statesman might be shown only when he was looking silly. Another thought. After-dinner speeches. AH very well; a good banquet" is a fine picture. But does the hero want to be seen discussing poverty in a boiled shirt, with a glass of port, two liqueurs, and a fat cigar in front of his right leg? And then—the House ot Commons. This invention may reopen that question. The broadcasting of a debate has always seemed to me to be a poor proposition; but if the House could be seen, especially on a big occasion, it might be quite another thing. But I hope that no one will propose to lipstick Mr Chamberlain. It is a far cry no doubt to that and other developments. Television cum telephone—a hideous possibility? Never again would the badgered public man be able to pretend that he was his brother or his butler. The hidden television set—as a burglar trap or spy? The outside broadcast —shall we see Ascot as well as hear about it—and the fashionable ladies jockeying for position before the instrument? Will telestuff in the home “kill” the cinema and the Press? I think not. But man cannot acquire the gift of seeing through mountains and brick walls without setting himself some spiky problems. The inventors and the 8.8. C. will have to face the first of them.