JUDGES WERE DDISAPPOINTED

New Zealand Listener, Volume 3, Issue 59, 9 August 1940, Page 9

JUDGES WERE DDISAPPOINTED

One-Act and Radio Play Competitions

6¢ ENERALLY speaking, the response to these competitions was disappointing, both numerically and artistically," said the judges in their comments on the recently concluded National Centennial one-act and radio play competitions. Substantial prizes were offered, but no award was given for the £70 first prize for a one-act play, and no award for the £30 second prize for a radio play. Two second prizes were given for the one-act competition, and in the radio play competition the £100 prize money was divided among three competitors. The winners were: One-act Stage Competition: Ist Prize: No’ award (£70). 2nd prize (equal £30 each): Miss M. Thomas, 21 Stanley Street, Claudelands, Hamilton, for her play, "IT IS-TO LIVE." Ian McLean, 346 The Terrace, Wellington, for his play, "STOP PRESS." ». Radio Play Competition: 1st Prize (equal, £33/6/8 each): Miss Gladys Judd, 39 Braithwaite Street, Karori, Wellington, W.3, for her play "NOSTALGIA." Russell Reid, 221 The Terrace, Wellington, for his play *"RAMSAY OF BURNTWOOD." Miss A. M. Green, 89 King’s Crescent, Lower Hutt, Wellington, for her play, "HELL SHIP OF THE PACIFIC." 2nd Prize: No award (£30). Judges’ Comment The judges stated: Twenty-nine plays were received for the Stage Play Competition, and twentyone for the Radio Play Competition. "STOP PRESS" and "IT IS-TO LIVE," while showing faults in technique and construction, both told a story logically and coherently. Many of the plays submitted lacked a basic idea, without which no playwright, however competent, can expect to be successful. A great number ofthe writers who submitted plays appeared to be actuated solely by the desire to write, rather than by any urgent desire to tell a story or exploit a theme. A number of the entries were not actually plays in the strict sense of the word — they were sketches, episodes, cameos, character studies. They lacked any form of conflict. A number of writers confused movement with action. A play in which nothing happens can have plenty of movement and still remain static. Action, on the other hand, | springs primarily from dialogue, and has no necessary connection with the bodily movement of various characters on the |

stage. A fault with many of the writers was their obvious lack of knowledge of the theatre. As was only to be expected, a number of the plays submitted were based on historical episodes, but in most of these cases dramatic values were sacrificed by unnecessarily dragging in historical incidents. Many of the episodes did not lend themselves to dramatic treatment, and in cases where they did, the situation was not exploited to the full. There was in this Competition a refreshing absence of gangsters, high society, and detectives. There seemed to be a general attempt to write of simpler matters, and subjects which sprang from individual experience. This is all to the good, and shows a desire to write at first hand, instead of second or third, Dialogue was a hurdle to many competitors. An attempt to infuse their play with a " literary " quality made it sound stilted and unnatural, and characterisation consequently suffered. Reading the play aloud before submitting it would probably have corrected many of these faults. Radio Plays With the Radio plays the judges took a more optimistic view. With one or two exceptions the competitors had a good working knowledge of the main requirements of a radio play. The three prizewinning plays are all worthy of produce tion-they have character, atmosphere, and a workmanlike technique, There was a general tendency among competitors to travel a well-worn path from the point of view of treatment-no daring experiments or new methods came to light. Many of the competitors were fully alive to the fact that radio, like the cinema, lends itself to a quick change of scene without losing anything of its effect. This competition, like the one-act play competition, showed a paucity of ideasthere was no story value in many of the plays. Hackneyed themes, impossible situations, and unnatural dialogue, cropped up again and again. Many competitors did not exploit radio technique to the full-they preferred to use the narrative past instead of the dramatic present in scenes that contained explanatory dialogue. There was a tendency to wordiness-a reluctance to get on with the story. The dialogue in a radio play must be cut to the bone to have any real effect. Sound effects, too, formed a stumbling block for many writers. They must be used with caution-as a means to an end, and not as an end in themselves. Many competitors overwrote themselves -having reached their climax they were not content to end there. There was a definite lack of characterisation in most of the plays submitted, and characterisation is particularly necessary in a radio play where the voice is the only means of identification. The introduction of characters is important-they should. be definitely established one by one. To epen a scene with half-a-dozen people talking and none of them addressed by name, spells ruin to the best of stories. Many competitors preferred to ‘describe each scene through an announcer, thus holding up the action of the play, rather than to paint the picture through a judicious use of dialogue.