INTERESTING DEBATE

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 9, Issue 83, 7 June 1946, Page 3

INTERESTING DEBATE

YOUNG FARMERS’ VIEWPOINT MORAL EFFECT OF THE CINEMA The subject for discussion at a well attended gathering of members of the Awakeri Young Farmers’ Club last Wednesday evening was ‘Has the cinema an undesirable effect on the moral welfare of the community.’ The affirmative and negative were taken by debating teams of three from the Awakeri and the Whakatane High School Clubs respectively, and a good standard of expression and elocution achieved. Splendid points were made by the Awakeri speakers who emphasised that the standard of film shown today was not setting the high example it should. It had won a front rank position for public education and yet its main emphasis lay with the cheap ‘thriller’ and an ability to arrest public imagination by exaggreated plots and undue suggestiveness with regard to sex. The .whole case from ‘youth’s’ point of view was well worth hearing and would probably have surprised some of our New Zealand theatre interests. The negative attitude was taken up by three speakers from the High School whose only fault lay in the fact that they read their speeches after a brief introduction. The logic and reasoning put forward was however of a high order, and the suggestion that the cinema could become one of the most potent forces for world peace if the right films were shown internationally was possibly the point of the evening. The challenge thrown out to the opposition to ‘stand up anyone who has been detrimentally affected morally through having attended the movies’ was a knock-out to say the least.

The adjudicators Messrs. J. Bigelow and C. Kingsley-Smith announced the result as ‘Affirmative’ 301, and ‘Negative’ 228, from a possible total of 400. The heaviest loss of marks as far as High School were concerned came from deductions inflicted for reading. Details of the mai'king were as under the winning side being mentioned first: Luttrell—subject 30 (possible 40), eloquence 15 (25), deportment 5 (10), reasoning 20 (25), summing up 45 (50); Martin—32, 19, 8, 18; J. Hanna—3B, 23, 9, 23. - High School: B. Mundy—subject 32 (40), eloquence 18 (25), deportment 8 (10), reasoning 20 (25), summing up 35 (50); Chadwick—2s, 18, 7, 15; Law—34, 22, 8, 22. This team was also penalised for not fully utilising its full allocation of time for each speaker.

Points were also awarded for general team work.