CRITICISM OF THE EXPENSIVE "FESTIVAL OF BRITAIN"

Wanganui Chronicle, 9 November 1950, Page 5

CRITICISM OF THE EXPENSIVE "FESTIVAL OF BRITAIN"

Public Says It Is An Eight Million "Unwanted Baby" LONDON, Oct. 31 (By Airmail).—All sorts of weirdly designed buildings are at last taking shape on the south bank of the Thames, between Westminster and Waterloo Bridge, ,and great activity in Battersea Park further upstream is bringing home to Londoners that Mr. Herbert Morrison’s £8,000.000 “baby,” the Festival of Britain, is growing out of its swaddling clothes.

It is strange that this really magnificent conception does not yet seem to have captured the imagination of the British public. In fact it has done little but excite criticism, chiefly on the grounds of expense.

There are six months before !t comes to fruition, and in that time apathy may have given way to grand enthusiasm, but there are obviously a good many people to whom this great national festival, to mark the centenary of the famous Crystal Palace Exhibition in London in 1851, has no appeal. They say, in various letters to London’s newspapers, that they cannot reconcile such a vast expenditure with Mr. Morrison’s own admission that the cost of living is rising, with the gloomy views on the impossibility of spending more money on food, as expressed by the Minister of Food (Mr Webb) and the warning by the chairman of the National Coal Board (Lord Hyndley) that more household economies might have to come. GRAND DEMONSTRATION. This festival is to be a demonstration on the grand scale of Britain's economic vitality and firm confidence in the future, a demonstration in which composers, actors, painters ana poets will join with craftsmen of industry to put the whole British Isles on show for the world, but even the indefatigible festival of British authorities, who seem to be providing thousands of words of publicity and propaganda daily, admit that there Is still a great (|eal of cynicism, lack of the enthusiasm, and even complete disinterest, to be overcome among the general public before the festival can be “put over” successfully. There are many who support two of the scheme’s chief opponents- Lord Beaverbrook’s “Daily Express” ana “Evening Standard”—in claiming that too much work and effort is being expended on something of little value and permanence, instead of being devoted to providing houses for Britain's homeless. On this ground the “Daily Express” has maintained a strong campaign against what it calls “that monstrous blossom of Mr. Morrison’s imagination.” The festival has other critics too, who shake their heads over the “waste” of money on unessentials, the high pi’ices to be charged for admittance and the tax the expected influx of visitors will impose on London's already overburdened accommodation They counter the retort that many thousands will be able to find room ?n the resorts outside London by grumbling that such a scheme will deprive any Londoner from booking accommodation on his holidays. Festival officials were somewhat shocked the other day when they heard Mr Paul Hoffman, chief of the E.C.A., say he did not know the festival was being held, and when he was told about, it they were equally irritated to hear him query whether there could possibly be enough beds for everyone expected. The officials explained that most of America’s public organisations had been kept informed about the festival pl.ins. They admitted, however, that the advertising campaign had not yet started in the United Stales. It would not. begin in strength until January. They passed the accommodation question Io the British Tourist and Holiday Board, which, in its turn, said it hoped to meet all extra demands. Hotels, the board said, would be providing 751) extra rooms, and the register of families willing to take • in visitors now

By.

J. M. READING

N.Z.P.A. Correspondent, London

numbered 2000. This was a system tried with great success at the recent Edinburgh festival. Four thousand visitors, anyway, will be housed in Britain’s first underground hotel —at present a 120 feet deep air raid shelter in the south of London. It is being reconditioned for travellers who will pay 3s a night. Priority of place will be given to overseas visitors, schoolchildren and groups of people not planning a long stay in London. Festival guthories claim that, everyone will want to come to the fair, but an inspection of the site does prompt the query of how everyone will get in. According to the official estimate, there will be room for about 60,000 people at a time at the Westminster site, and about the same number at Battersea, and it is calculated that if there is an even flow coming and going 300,000 people can visit the exhibition in a single day, but the main fairway through the site is not much more than 150 feet wide; so it appears as though the old and familiar queue will have to develop. CHARGES CRITICISED. The “New Statesman and Nation,” which has been mildly criticising the arrangements, concludes that the expensive entrance charges—4s at Ihe turnstiles, 5s if booked in advance, with admission guaranteed, and children under 15 half-price —had to be imposed to meet the threat of overcrowding. The festival director-gen-eral, Mr. Gerald Barry, replied to complaints of high charges by recalling that a 100 years ago, at. the Crystal Palace Exhibition, the organisers charged £1 for admission on the first two days and 5s for the next three weeks. After that the charges ranged from Is to ss. according to the day of the week. He added: “A hundred years ago, a shilling was worth at least five times, perhaps nearer 10 times, what it is worth today in tennis of purchasing power, and in relation to what a man earned. That being so, the cheapest price of admission to the Crystal Palace was, in relative terms, certainly no lower than the festival charges and the rest were much higher.” But this delving into the past has not satisfied lhe critics, who say that just because it is a once-in-a-century affair, there is no excuse for wanting more from a public always with its hands in its pocket. Alone of the great buildings on the south bank site which docs not belong to the Festival of Britain, is the Royal j Festival conceit hall the only permanent building on the site—and it is the responsibility of the London County Council. Its concrete shell s complete, and its vast ceiling all but finished. Immense, flat surfaced and angular, it has no curves except the ceiling and staircase. And, again alone, it has not yet been criticised. Musical men who have entered it in its unfinished state have not been quite sure wh it Io say about it. except to give lie* marks for acoustics. One of their number, however, from the “Sunday Times," recalls that the French had a word for the modern he,use- “a machine for living.” So he has christened te new hall “a machine for hearing music.’’