OUR FILM REVIEWS

New Zealand Listener, Volume 5, Issue 118, 26 September 1941, Page 4

OUR FILM REVIEWS

»ir,-My comments upon your film review’s criticism of a certain screen production have been misunderstood and distorted. What I pointed out was that "G.M.’s" description of"a risqué play as "bright, farcical entertainment" amounted to con--donation of film indecency. Whether I myself witnessed the film in question has no bearing upon the argument; consequently, Mr. Editor, your footnote to my letter was beside the point. Now we have two anonymous correspondents (Listener, September 12) who uphold your reviewer. One of them over the initials "H.W.," says he "supports ‘G.M.’ against the dull moral and etymological puritanism of L. D. Austin." He goes on‘to remark that "those of us who are mentally adult know that ‘ bright farcical entertainment’ has depended on risqué (i.e., indecent) situations from Aristophanes to Hollywood, and we are content to enjoy what has amused every generation to date." According to "H.W.," then, it is simply "dull" to be moral, immorality being so much brighter. This, Mr. Editor, is the considered opinion of a " mentally adult" person! A better term would be

mentally adulterated. It is quite erroneous to assert that indecency has always been an _ essential ingredient of bright farcical entertainment. What about the musical farces of Gilbert and Sullivan and hosts of others that could be mentioned? No decent-minded individual is really amused by suggestive innuendo, whether in films or books. I challenge "H.W.," Sir, to re-express his commendation of indecency in public entertainment and to sign his full name to his letter. But of course he will not do this because he has not the courage of his alleged convictions, "H.W.’s" further championship of Americanised English is naturally on a par with his "adult mentality." He rejoices in the debasement of our beautiful mother tongue by the admixture of hideous Yankee slang. There is no need to waste words over such a self-condemnatory attitude. As for the question put to me by your second correspondent, "Just Curious," viz., whether I object on similar grounds to Mozart’s Cosi Fan Tutte -I presume he means to its libretto-my answer is, yes, if the work be given in English without expurgation. Sung in Italian, nobody cares twopence. " Just Curious" may be interested to know that various attempts have been made to amend the libretto and render it fit for respectable British ears. Three versions of it are extant under the following titles: "Tit for Tat" (produced at the Lyceum Theatre, London, 1828), "The Retaliation " (Lyceum, 1841), "The School for Lovers" (by Marmaduke Brown, 1890). Not even Mrs, Grundy could take exception to these translations, which, however, still remain "bright farcical entertainment."

L. D.

AUSTIN

Wellington).

(Our correspondent asked why we devoted space to film reviews. We told him why. If that was " beside the point" his letter was sheer humbug.-Ed.)