Can Literature be Broadcast?

Radio Record, Volume II, Issue 32, 22 February 1929, Unnumbered Page

Can Literature be Broadcast?

Mr. Aldous Huxley, the famous Novelist, is inclined to think not

HIS question is of growing importance and interest, and in the "Radio Times" appears an article on it from Mr. Huxley. In comment, on that article the editor says :- "While welcoming to our columns one of the most distinguished of contemporary writers, we cannot refrain from registering a comment upon Mr. Huxley’s argument. In one respect, he seems to us to do less than justice both to the B.B.C. and its listeners. He appears to, regard the B.B.C. as an institution which follows cautiously certain well-worn and constricted lines of artistic development, confining its programmes to matter of ‘the lowest common measure of artistic excellence.’ In effect, he accuses the B.B.C. of attempting the impossible object of ‘pleasing all the people all the time.’ Such an ideal, if indeed it ever were held by Savoy Hill, has long since been

discarded. A perusal of the programmes would reveal to Mr. Huxley the catholicity of the matter broadcast. Modern chamber music and musical comedy, the literary short story, and the comedian’s monologue-there is place for each and each has its adherents. For our own part, we see no reason why the length or nature of any short story should stand in the way of its being broadcast, provided that the project is artistically a sound one from the point of view of microphone production. This would not, of course, be the case with a story of superlative length or particular emphasis upon such a subject as sex. We are inclined to agree with Mr. Huxley that the microphone may not be pre-eminently the suitable medium for literature, but it would be deplorable if the material of broadcasting. were to consist only of the second-rate, the so-called ‘popular.’ Happily it does not. Nor is the ‘popular’ invariably ‘second-rate.’ "

s--| HEORETICALLY, any human ac- ))| tivity that is susceptible of being expressed in terms of sound can be broadcast. Anything, for example, that can be printed in a book can be read into a microphone and thence, across the ether, into the ears of listeners. Theoretically. But there are practical difficulties which severely limit the actual realisation of these theoretical possibilities. It is possible to broadcast the contents of any book; but in practice the majority of books will never be broadcast, for the simple reason "hat they are too long, or that their appeal is not universal, but specialised, or because they are too difficult to be understood, or too subtly beautiful to be appreciated at a single hearing. "The wiréless station will never replace the . printing press. There will always be readers, as well as listeners. What applies to literature in general applies to that particular little province of literature which we call the Short Story. Theoreti_cally, any short story can be broadcast. But ix. practice, we can feel quite certain, only a very small proportion of the short stories actually composed by authors of merit will ever be broadcast. Let us go into the reasons for this in detail. HE short story is short in relation to the novel, which has been defined by Mr. E. M. Forster as a piece of fiction of more than fifty thousand words. A short story is any piece of fiction of less than fifty thousand

words. Some excellent short stories are only two or three thousand words long, otkers run to twenty or thirty thousand words. volume of three hundred pages may contain three short stories or twenty. There is no rule; the length depends on the ature of the subject treated, and _ the author’s method of treatment. True, artificial, and arbitrary rules have been imposed by the editors of magazines which buy short stories. In America, which is the principal market for short stories, the standard length for such pieces of fiction is about six or eight thousand words. A few years ago editors wanted only three or four thousand. Increase in the number of advertising pages has necessitated a corresponding increase in pages of text, and writers must now double the length of their stories, in order that the spaces between the eulogies of tooth-paste and plumbing fixtures, motor-cars, and candy may be duly filled. Now, the number of words that can‘ be audibly and expressively read out loud in an hour is from eight to ten thousand. This means that a long short story (the phrase is idiotic, but unavoidable) would take anything from three to five hours to read; a mediumsized short story, two hours, or an hour and a half; a short story of standard American magazine length, about an hour or three-quar-ters of an hour. The mere statement of these figures is enough to make it obvious that a whole class

of short stories (containing some of the most admirable specimens of fiction in existence) can never be broadcast at all. Few broadcasting stations, I imagine, will want to make use of any story the reading of which takes more than an hour. And even an hour may seem a little long. For broadcasting purposes, the ideal short story would be one of three or four thousand words, of twenty or thirty minutes. So much for the first difficulty in the way of broadcasting short stories. There are other difficulties no less grave-difficulties arising, not from the length of the story, but from its character, from its subject matter and style. Thus, there are many very fine short stories which deal with what are beautifully and vaguely called ‘controversial subjects" in a "controversial manner." In practice, this generally means that they deal with the subject of sex in a manner more frank than that in which rural deans and middleaged maiden ladies are accustomed to deal with it. There are, of course, other controversial subjects-that is to say, other subjects about which one cannot talk in mn wunconventional manner without shocking a substantial percentage of adult men and women. Political economy, for example, is highly controversial. The statement that the present system of distributing wealth is not the best and most efficient that can be devised by human and even diviné ingenuity is one which (Continued on page 2.)

-_ . Olan Kiterature be Broadcast? (Conchuled from front page.) pce admiring citizens find pr0otpi iy distressing, outrageous, and amoral. Only less controversial are ns of religion, of birth-control, ty politics. With most of these ipeets, however, the short story is i very Misely to deal; for the writer fietion, the subject of sex remains host important of controversial ~*Bhe itweebors of broadcasting con- , Hike the editors of popular ma2 with large circulations, do not controversial contributions which may offepd a substantial proportion of public, Their objection eliminates yer large class of artistically admizable short stories. Almost as ‘Widely unpopular as the shocking is the too true, the cruel, the inggic, the sordid story. The great majority of films and agazine stories have eres endings of kinema-goers and "magazine devs do not like unhappy ones; they he mostly xemote from reality, beis¢ most people do not like to have mity shown to them, The wireless tens for a public as large, mixed, qd indiseriminate as the kinema or fie big mazazines. This public conims the ordinary percentage of shock- : bragedy-shy reality-haters, to Mose preferences and dislikes due dee renee has to be paid. ais Means that yet another and eu important elass of short story can saiikom or never be broadcast. When vee necessany diseounts have been Suede we discover that the only short Sories that are ever likely to be freely fpoadcast axe stories of less than five is ne sand words dealing conventionally not too realistically with safe subsects of an untragic and optimism-pro-roking nature.

In other words, the only short stories that are ever likely to be freely broadcast are short stories of exactly the same kind as are now published in the popular magazines. For those who are interested in literature and the realities with which literature is supposed to deal, it will be a matter of perfect jndifference whether such stories are proadeast or not. They know in advance that practically all the short stories in which they are interested are not likely to be broadcast at all. When they wish to read the stories . that interest them they will turn, as they have always done, to books. NE of the great charms of literature is that it is an art which can be appreciated in silence and solitude. It need not. like music, be performed. Onee a book is printed there is a direct communication between author and reader. The broadcasting of stories has the effect of interposing a quite unnecessary interpreter between reader and writer; it breaks the silence, intrudes on the solitary privacy in which the literature-lover is privileged to enjoy his favourite art. Personally I would never dream of listening to a story if I could read it to myself. Hiven a good story. And in practice, as we have seen, the majority of stories read into the microphone are likely to be as poor as the majority of stories published in the magazines or turned into films, and for the same reasons-first, because there are not enough good stories being produced to supply the daily demand, and, second, because, even if there were, most of them would be very distateful to a great many people. A publisher need not consider the many people to whom the book he is publishing will be distasteful. Only those who like the author’s work will buy the book; he is publishing for a limited audience. But an editor who is selling two million copies of his magazine, a film producer who is catering for a world-

wide public, a wireless director who is broadcasting over whole countries and continents, have no such freedom. They are not appealing to a special but to a mixed and general public. They must hit on a kind of lowest common measure of artistic excellence. They cannot afford to purvey outstanding originality, because, except in rare cases, outstanding originality (especially in literature) is liable to offend at least as many people as it pleases. We are thus forced to conclude that, so far as literary art is concerned, the broadcasting of short ‘stories is as irrelevant as the publication of short stories in popular magazines, The thing may be done, and may even prove a popular attraction; but that it can in any way either assist or harm the cause of literature I greatly doubt.