Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. Victoria University of Wellington Student's Newspaper. Volume 31, Number 3. March 19 1968

Letters to the editor

Letters to the editor

Salient review criticised

Sir—'Who is Derek Melser?'

This is a question I asked you, Mr. Logan after reading the edition of Salient dated March 12, 1968.

'I don't know', you replied.

'Well, actually', said I, 'he's your drama critic!'

This conversation pinpoints a basic problem that the Drama Club is faced with in connection with Salient, namely, ineffectual reviewing.

Criticism is necessary but it must be well-founded and constructive and it must come from a person who has the knowledge to substantiate the criticism.

In the case of this last review your readers are faced with a superficiality that those who saw the play will find hard to credit as coming from one who must be considered as Salient drama critic.

I have no particular inclination to tear Mr. Melser's review to pieces bit by bit; it isn't worth the trouble. However I would like to point out to him that sarcasm is considered the weakest method of criticism and that, although one critic does not have to agree with facts and with other critics, I give him these thoughts to consider.

• That the script that he refers to as 'hapless' has had successful runs throughout Europe and England.

• That Russell Bond, Dominion Art Critic, considered this a play that should be seen.

• That on the night I saw the play the audience forced four curtain calls and wanted more.

I would like to congratulate Salient on last year's comprehensive film coverage. I see, from this issue, that some sort of effort is being made to provide a comparative coverage in drama. As there is a continual stream of productions through the year in Wellington this service, if it is maintained will be greatly appreciated. However it is no use putting inexperienced people on the job. The review will be recognized as the work of such a person and will be worthless. I have suggested to you privately that you approach downtown personalities if you cannot find the experience on the campus. You rejected the suggestion expressing a wish to keep your paper in student hands. I would point out to you that the Drama Club is also in student hands but in order to keep our standard as high as possible we endeavour to employ professional producers. In recognition of this endeavour we would appreciate a reciprocal move.

Chris Rosie,

[Bob Lord is in charge of Salient's drama reviews. His name has been left off the credit list in error. However some questions about Derek Melser have satisfied me that he is in every way suited to drama reviews in Salient (except, perhaps, in his not being a student).

Mr. Melser has graduated from Victoria with an M.A. in Philosophy, has for a number of years displayed an active interest in theatre in Wellington, and is a former editor of the literary magazine, Argot.

The brevity of the review and its failure to adequately substantiate all its points is my own fault. It was written to a very tight deadline because I wanted it to get into the first issue of Salient which was published before. The Promise had finished its showing. This eventually proved to be impossible. Perhaps to the satisfaction of the Drama Club.

Successful runs in Europe and England seems to be no criteria. I believe The Sound of Music is popular, and Agatha Christie's The Mousetrap is in its fifteenth year in London.

It has been suggested that if use of "professionals" is responsible for the standard of Drama Club productions, it may be desirable for Salient to continue to refrain from using unprofessional reviewers.—ed.]

Prohibitive

Sir—It is time the student body rose up in protest at the prohibitive price of textbooks. We are at the mercy of the sharks of commerce. Thirty pounds is a normal price a student can expect to pay to furnish himself with the required textbooks. There appears to be no relationship between the listed price and the real value. I found one Stage III text retailing at $5.40, $6.00 and $6.60 respectively at three different shops. Without denying the owners of the means of distribution the profit appropriate to their capitalist station, I feel that if one firm can extract a suitable profit from a price, then so can the others without lashing out for another 22%.

I would like to see an enquiry made into relative prices between firms and into profits in general. If the results show that excess provts are being that excess profits are being students, then the possibility should be investigated of the Student Union or some University body buying from the publishers and selling to the student at minimum or no profit, the textbooks required for all courses in the University.

Mass student action forced the government to become aware of our bursary needs. The time has come again for such action to prevent our imbalances being rent asunder, by the grasping tentacles of commerce.

Yours sincerely,

Paul T. Callaghan.

S.C.M. book problem

Sir—I would like to warn students of a certain malpractice, although by the time this is printed it may be too late. It concerns the SCM second-hand bookstall. I bought a book for Quantitative Analysis which cost $5.00. This particular book was the second edition and on attending the first lecture in Q.A. I found that only the third edition of the book was acceptable. In other words my second edition was obsolete.

On returning to the bookstall in an attempt to have my money refunded or the book exchanged I was informed that neither alternative was possible. It was unfortunate, I was told, but the odd book in the obsolete category did get through unnoticed.

Later the same day in the bookstall I noticed several copies of the second edition still for sale so it was obvious that they were not making any attempt to withdraw these obsolete books from sale. I am also informed that 50c of my $5.00 goes to help Christian work. This I do not object to but I do object to being sold an obsolete book so my money can go to others while I gain nothing.

I maybe a bit ignorant concerning religion but this particular act does not strike me as being very Christian. Being an impoverished student I just cannot afford to throw away $5.00. Hoping others will not get caught the same way.

I remain, etc.,

W. J. Watson.

Art Magazine

Sir—I would like to add some comments to the review which appeared in Salient last week. New Zealand's first art magazine "comparable with overseas art magazines" predictably enough called Ascent" it was I felt, despite the high quality art paper tediously unimaginative in layout and solemn in tone. To me it is an art magazine for the sake of having an art magazine.

The editorial aim is not apparently to stimulate, not to proselytize, but simply to erect a memorial to our small and in any case dubious art establishment. Your reviewer Mary Everett thought it a pity that that there is no biographical information on the artists, or notes on the contributors. This was merely a symptom of the general attitude of the magazine. Anyone vaguely interested in "The Arts" is assumed to know this sort of thing: a graphic "Landfall" has been published.

Why must the New Zealand "art lover" take his arts and himself so seriously? I suspect that these people despite their incessant bemoaning of the cultural wasteland in which they find themselves secretly enjoy, and seek in ways like this to preserve their role of pearls among swine or something.

Anyone would of course have to be obsessed with art to the point of idiocy to pay $1.50 for a copy and plough through articles like "What is Art Supposed to Do?". "The New Zealand Print Council" (fascinating) and "The Trapdoor Spider and the Great Leap Outwards", the original version of which I, for one, had heard before anyway—to see Patrick Hanley's magnificent painting "New Order 29" and some remarkable Barry; Cleavin etchings.

I personally admire the work of Rita Angus, McCahon and Moffit, but reproduced as they were, in black and white. Without comment, the paintings were worthless. They were not published necessarily because they are for sale at the moment, but simply because they are there.

The whole business is so academic, so detached. And yet, precisely what is needed for art in New Zealand is some sort of commercial stimulus. There were no details of current or forthcoming exhibitions, as your reviewer rightly pointed out, let alone anything as nasty as details of recent sales, with the sort of prices being paid for paintings in New Zealand. There was only one advertisement by a commercial art gallery. (Other owners probably felt that sales and readership of so sterile a journal would not make it worth their while.)

There was no mention of the sort of work being done by our young painters in the art Schools.

Ascent cannot be expected to survive a second edition without a radical change in outlook and policy.

Peter Graham.

Our Mistake

Sir—Conrad Bollinger's account of the Jenkins episode in his reminiscences of Salient in his time is not quite accurate. Mr Jenkins exercised his right of appeal to the Council against the Professorial Board's £5 penalty, and the Council allowed it. It was, therefore, the Council that let him off, not the Board.

Yours etc.,

W. J. Scott,

Member of Council,

1948-1952. 1963—