Tv—A fortnight or so ago I • felt obliged (most reluctantly, because negative criticism is distasteful) to criticise an unnecessary scene in a televised B.B.C. play. Today, and with far more point, I must protest emphatically against Associated Television choice of "Frolic Wind " on Saturday night.
It was an unsavoury business of no great merit, totally unfitted for the home.
The story of four repressed old ladies, one of whom was discovered to secrete hoards of pornograpli■ in her lair, and this assodated with midnight unclothed bathing by tender lovers, was-to put it bluntl -a dirty story.
Nor was there any compensation either in purpose or in artistry. The wretched storm symbolism was piled on with such gusto that one waited, fearfully, for the next mention, which always came like a jack-in-the-box.
In this connection I may report that a member of the family absent for some months could not but exclaim at the new lowness of television on the basis of two evenings' viewing since her return.
HAPPILY, much of TV. remains overwhelmingly good and worthwhile. "Christian Forum," for example, was a programme whose title may have repelled viewers yet whose subject could not fail to be of the greatest interest. Questions like divorce, Christian pacifism. Christian communism are not " pious" questions, but matters that preoccupy any mind with a glimmer of intelligence and interest.
It was a well-balanced team with the Abbot of Downside, Dr. Soper and Lord Hailshain. Its one fault was that it was too short. Try judging the worth of a programme by the speed with which the end comes. It is no bad test.
ANOI HER brilliant affair this week was " Free Speech." which really turned into free speech and something nearing a
bit of bad blood. Whatever one thought of the views and the people, it was like a fresh wind blowing across convention and
artificiality. M. B.
RAD110.—A year or two ago I scarcely ever listened to Woman's Hour in the Light programme every afternoon from two till three. The lure of the " Schools " at the same time in the Home programme was irresistible. Now either I know the Schools programmes by heart or else Woman's Hour is getting more and more interesting. I rather think it is the latter.
A fascinating series called " Ways and Means " has just finished, For eight days we heard the budgets and general ideas on housekeeping from housewives with incomes ranging from 1.5 a week upwards.
The overall impression I get was that no one is really poor any more. That nearly all the wives
supplement their husband's incomes by regular or part-time work. Also that families are still pretty small. The largest family in the whole series was a very edifying Catholic one with five children. It was a joy to hear her saying that Mass and Benediction took an important part of her Sunday.
Also in Women's Hour I have heard some very amusing remarks from women writers in another series called " Writers Talking." When clever people get together. men or women, they invariably bring out a variety of views on children's upbringing or the modern child. From a welter of opinions I have heard in the first two of these discussions two stand out as particularly striking -G. f3. Stern's understatement a propos of badly behaved modern children, " there is nothing wrong with discipline"; then Ethel Mannin shocking Marguerite Steen and Jacobin° Hichens when she said she considered the child's character to be formed in the first five years of its life. 1 think I have heard that before somewhere: