On Friday evening, 3rd October, “Any Questions?” returned to the air. Members of a West Country audience once again put their questions to a team of four “experts” who gave spontaneous and unscripted answers. On this programme the questions are mostly topical, sometimes flippant, and deemed to be of interest to the general public.
This was the day of the big British Largest-Ever Atomic Bang, and the first questioner enquired if we should be proud of our achievement. Graham Hutton, economist, in reply, thought we should feel proud from a scientific point of view, but not if it were to be put to “evil” use. He said it was a good thing that America and Russia were now not alone in this respect. The fact that Britain could make atomic bombs struck a better balance. Robert Henriques welcomed the achievement as it meant we were once again a World Power, undoubtedly we had been slipping; he thought we should feel responsible, not proud. Mrs. Stocks thought that a thing worth doing was worth doing well and took pride in the fact that Britain is a “humane and civilised nation.”
The second questioner asked the team if they believed in the presence of angels, and if so, in what form do they exist. The audience chortled immoderately, apparently a goodly slice present of Tom Driberg’s “85 per cent. Unbelievers or Indifferents.”
Robert Henriques rebuked the audience for their unseemly hilarity, said he was a Jew, and certainly took his angels very seriously. Both Mrs. Stock and Ralph Wightman said they always “wanted to laugh” when they pictured an angel with long hair, nightgown, wings and ukelele, but (for some obscure reason) they felt quite solemn when they imagined one “standing in the sun.” The story was then told of how a gaggle of angels were mustering before the Lord and the devil sneaked in with the crowd. (Reason not stated, but probably out of pure devilment.) The Lord, perspicacious as ever, spotted the black sheep in the fold and winkled him out. The point of this story being that there are undoubtedly good angels and bad.
The audience was temporarily subdued and the Question Master passed to the next question, “Which was worse, inflation or deflation?” The ball was placed at the feet of the economist, Graham Hutton, who apparently wanted to see the other members of the team stick out their necks first. Ralph Wightman tackled bravely, then realising that the subject was not his line of territory, informed an hilarious audience that he had recently seen an advertisement for “Inflationary Bra's.” After this somewhat irrelevant digression, Graham Hutton cut loose on the question; he defined inflation and deflation and said it was “ for the economist to study, tell the truth and for the politicians to act on it. Hence it was not up to economists but the politicians.” He thought the answer was stability, but on the whole “ slight inflation was easier to cope with.” Mrs. Stock made earnest suggestions as to how it might be controlled, and Henriques thought that “production was the answer.” Graham Hutton made some extraordinary statements about Russia being able to balance her economy overnight by shooting people, reducing rations and putting 10 million people in concentration camps.
The next question was on the subject of co-education, and the team were unanimously in favour—with the exception of boarding schools.
Question No. 5: “ Will the rivalry between Capitalist states inevitably lead to war? ”
On the morning of this particular broadcast the Press carried reports of Stalin’s latest speech in which he asserted that the capitalist countries, by which he meant the Western bloc, would war with one another. When answering the question, the team carried on the usual implication that Russia is not a capitalist country and said it was unthinkable that we should war with France, America or any of our present allies.
Here let it be pointed out that a cursory glance back over the past half-century shows some incredible feats of shuffling, quick changes and diplomatic gymnastics round the international cauldron. Alas! The shifting quicksands of capitalist propaganda; to-day the Germans and Japanese who until recently hogged all the black limelight, now have to be white-washed, and a policy designed to keep them from sliding into the Russian camp. The eye-wash that wars are waged in a crusading spirit of good against evil becomes daily more ridiculous and the commercial nature of both the great struggles is being universally recognised. From 1904 onwards, when the commercial rivalry of Germany began to make itself felt, a marked change came over the policy of the British Government. Hitherto France had been Britain’s traditional enemy, but in face of this new danger an alliance was formed and Germany became the “enemy.”
Robert Henriques, answering the question, thought it unlikely that the Allies would war between themselves. Both he and Mrs. Stock were against rearming the Germans, as they were a "fundamentally war like nation.” It was agreed that Stalin’s speech was encouraging in a way. It showed that he was continuing with the “cold war” and would do all he could to "sow dissension" among the Western Powers. Mrs. Stock said she wouldn’t call Britain a capitalist country, but half-capitalist and half-socialist. She thought Germany was dangerous and would try to regain her Eastern provinces and should be "continuously disarmed.” Ralph Wightman, agreeing with Mrs. Stock, also said he thought that “no man should have the power to make money out of arms.” A worthy but futile thought which earned its round of applause.
In answer to the last question regarding a hypothetical change of vocation, Henriques said he would be a Barrow Boy as "you could choose what you wanted to sell.” Hutton would be a Newspaper Boy, as no salesmanship is needed, "they almost sell themselves.” Mrs. Stock and Ralph Wightman would be Window Cleaners, the former because she is "good at it,” and the latter because he thought he might "see some very interesting things.” This caused a ripple of laughter, and on this note the meeting closed.
On questions of the day this programme has always been an inextricably mixed grill of confusion. The teams invariably suffer from the political myopia characteristic of those who swallow present-day Press and Radio unquestioningly, book, line and sinker. So far as the audience is concerned, even if, in the future they ask useful questions, i.e., questions that have some bearing on their position in society, it is extremely improbable that they will get the right answers on this programme.
F. M. Robins
No comments:
Post a Comment