A Corpse Is Revived

Radio Record, 1 April 1938, Page 12

A Corpse Is Revived

The Author’s Point of View — On the Little Theatre Concern About Play Production Fees

Special to the "Record" by

C.H.

F.

HERE are, it is commonly said, two sides to every argument, and now, from a reliable source, comes the other side of "Jack Daw’s" story, "Tragedy in One Act," which recently appeared in the "Record." "Jack Daw" predicted. more or less, the extinction of the Little Theatre movement in New Zealand on account of excessive royalty demands for rights to produce plays. There appear to be no grounds for considering this extinction at all likely. There has, unquestionably, been a good deal of discussion in amateur dramatic circles about authors’ royalties, and a good deal of misleading information has been bruited abroad. Asa result, many societies seem to be under serious misapprehension. In contrast, this article will outline the attitude of the largest firm of authors’ agents, Messrs. Samuel French, Ltd.

It must be remembered that plays are the property of the various authors who, naturally, may do what they will with that property. This propertythe copyright, in other words-is their source of income. A playwright expects his remuneration from royalties -amateur just as much as professional. Put bluntly, the drama is a commercial proposition so far as the dramatist is concerned. So his copyright is marketed by him to obtain the best possible return. He endeavours, of course, to see that amateur drama is kept alive-so long as it does not become merely a non-paying parasite. Both morally and legally, the play belongs to the author and he alone can decide what will be done with it. Natur-

ally, he wishes it performed-at a fee; also naturally he must not make that fee so high that it will deprive him of a source of income. It is the law of supply and demand again. If fees are prohibitive, they will certainly be reduced. That is French’s practice. When a play fails te draw when first released for amateurs at the usual fee of £5/5/-, or when @ once-popular play becomes a little older, reduction in fee follows, until eventually a "bargain basement" price of £2/2/- is reached. Since October 1 last year, seventy-one plays lave been reduced from £5/5/- to £3/8/-, including such succexses as "After All," "Behold, We Live," "Children in Uniform," "There’s Always Juliet.’ Many others, such as "Brown Sugar,’ "The Improper Duchess," and "Mary Stuart" have been reduced since the same date from three to two guineas, The author must, and does, adjust his fee so that it will not kill, or even injure, the amateur theatre, Large societies can, and do, pay the top fee for the most recent plays. So do may smaller societies-those that eannot always chooxe from the very wide selection of cheaper plays nN THOUGUTLESS and rather unintelligent contention has been raised that conditions in New Zealand are dit-

ferent from conditions elsewhere: settlement is so} sparse and so much of the population lives in small country districts. These are given as reasons for the reduction of fees. Similarly, it has been argued that smaller towns should pay less than large towns. Conditions in New Zealand are not greatly different from conditions elsewhere. In many parts of the British Isles, in Australia and in Canada, our own conditions of population are reproduced. Furthermore, it is interesting that amateur dramatic activity is everywhere much more pronounced in smaller centres than it is in larger ones. With a population of eight to ten millions, London has colparatively little in the way of amateur drama, As for the argument that smaller centres should pay less, if must be pointed out that the fee is charged per performance: obviously it is useless performing a play un-

jess there 1S prospect OL gettlils Ole decent-sized audience at least. It would be ridiculous for any society to perform more plays than they could get audiences. Conversely, even in London, more cannot be crowded into a theatre than it will seat. The same applies to Dunedin, Invercargill or Tuatapere. Royalties are universally paid in respect of each performance: a theatre or hall is only a theatre or hall be it in London or Levin. As for size-it often is smaller in a large city than in a small town. HE charges made by French’s are briefly given here. Performances of full-length plays cost two to five guineas, according to tariff. Sometimes there is

a reduction of a guinea for subsequent consecutive performances in the same hall, or there may be reductions for performances in a small hall. There is no fixed fee for ,al} plays. This depends, naturally, on play and on author. For one-act pliys, fees vary considerably, ranging from 5/- to £2/2/-. Half a guinea is a fair average. Plays in great demund usually run out at 15/- to £1/1/-. Higher fees than one guinea are rare. No reductions are made for repeated performances or the use of small halls, The position is somewhat more complicated when it comes to reading. French’s define a reading as a performance, and reasonably so. In order to defeat attempts at evasion, "Charge for admission" includes any charge made for programmes, for supper or any other form of valuable consideration in connection with the performance. Bearing this in mind, it may be stated that for readings where not more than 50 persons are present in the audience (which may consist of members, or members and guests), gud where ne charge is made for admission, there is no fee. Kor readings in excess of that number, or for which a charge is made, there is a set fee of £1/1/- for three-act plays, and 7/6 for one-act plays. (Cont. on page 87.)

A Corpse Is Revived

MORE ABOUT AUTHORS’ COPYRIGHT FEES

(Continued from page 12.)

Where a performance is given by u society, Women’s institute or similar group, before an audience of its own members not exceeding 25, and in respect of which no charge is made for admission, no fee is payable. There seems to be little ground for eavilling in these charges. Of course, all performances (including readings) that are not "domestic" or "quasidomestic" are liable for royalties. Even if no charge is made and only members are admitted a fee is generally, in strict law, payable; but authors, as will have been seen, do give up some of their legal rights in practice, and are by no means unsympathetic or unappreciative of the work done by amateurs in keeping up public interest in their works, G.B.S.’s Example T has been suggested that authors should folow Bernard Shaw’s example of charging a percentage of the gross takings. But there are serious and, indeed, insuperable objections to this. First, it gives the author no control over the price of admission, which under such a system it would be most important should be kept at a proper level. Second, there is no satisfactory system of calculating, or of checking, the recipts of an amateur company. Third, the fixed fee enables the author to keep some sort of tag on the quality of performance of his plays. In calculating on a percentage system it is invariably required (even by Mr. Shaw himself) that an allowance for all members’ seats allotted free or at reduced price shall be added to the gross receipts at the full price for which similar seats are available to the public. Amateur societies would do well to calculate how much more they would have to pay, in most cases, under such a system than under the present system. Ten, or even five, per cent. On a gross amount so totalled would often be a handsome sum, Also, under the suggested system, no allowance would be made for readings or for the use of small halls, N this subject, Mr. Cyril Hogg, managing director of French's, thus expressed himself in a recent issue of the "Amateur Theatre": "If a ' percentage system were adopted, similar to that in operation in the professional theatre, would many societies playing to large audiences be prepared to pay more than £5/5/- (their present maximum), as their return would undoubtedly warrant? I think not. "The fixed price arrangement ensures that societies know from the outset where they stand financially and can arrange their performances accordingly. It has always worked satisfactorily for our authors and audiences. The great majority of authorg understand that it is good business for them and gives them security. "In addition, it does not lend itself, as the sliding-scale does, to arguments and dissatisfaction over assessments.

The fixed fee is not open to abuse by the unscrupulous as a percentage system is. "And let me say candidly that a play Which comes on the market and which large numbers of amateurs are in agonies in their desires to perform, will always be rated at £5/5/- until the cemand for it has waned. Why not? "In fairness to everybody concerned, especially the author, a success fresh from professional honours must be exploited to the best advantage in the first instance in the amateur market." T is not true to state that exorbitant demands are being made which will force the amateur societies out of existence. Extravagant tales about demands for huge sums for past royalties are false. The only societies which are pressed for payment are the very small minority of recalcitrant societies which carry on as "pirates" in defiance of all legal and moral obligations, and do everything possible to evade payment of the author’s just dues. Only "Pirates" Chased Authors are determined to stamp out dishonesty of this sort quite ruthlessly. And who can blame them? The use of a play without the author’s consent is the exact equivalent of the conversion of another person’s motor-car-except that the offence is known by the somewhat gentler word "infringement." Some people seem to have a very peculiar moral attitude toward plays. Men and women who would not dream of shoplifting or petty thieving are sometimes content to sit on committees and acquiesce calmly in the theft-to give it the only true word-of an author’s property. Because that property is peculiarly difficult to protect, then surely it is all the more cowardly to attack. Why steal a play any more than a pound of butter or a motor-car? Authors and their agents are not hard or unsympathetic. They insist merely on a certain very simple stane dard of honesty. No society is prosecuted for infringement unless it has committed deliberate infringement or has been deliberately evasive. Most societies in New Zealand have always paid royalties in full and without complaint. Extra fees now payable for readings are very unlikely to affect their financial position to any extent. There will be no corpse in this Little Theatre ‘Tragedy in One Act."