The Third Programme A Literary History KATE WHITEHEAD CLARENDON PRESS OXFORD 1787 Oxford Uniirrsify Press, lYblton Street, Oxford 0x2 ~DP Oxjord New lbrk Toronto I>elhi Bonr1)ay Calcutta hfadras Karachi Acknowledgements Petaling Jaya .Tingapore Hong Kong Tokyo Nairobi Var es .Sa/aant Cape ?bwn Melbourne Auckland and associated companies in I would like to thank the following people for their kind Bzrlin Ibadan assistance during my research: the late Douglas Cleverdon and Oxford is a trade mark of Oxford Uniuersifj Press John Lehmann, Patric Dickinson, Harman Grisewood, Professor Peter Laslett, Ludovic Kennedy, Ian MacIntyre, Leonard Miall, Published in the United .States P. H. Newby, Piers Plowright, Harry Ritchie, Rosaly Roffman. Iy Oxfork Uniuersify Press, U.TA Dr Michael Weaver supervised the thesis on which this mono- 0 Kate Whitehead 1989 graph is based, and was helpful and enthusiastic throughout. The staff at the BBC Written Archives Centre provided . All rights reserved. No part of this publication nray be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transnritted, in any form or by any means, invaluable assistance during three years' regular attendance and rlectronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without enquiry. I must also thank the staff of the Society of Authors, the the prior permission of Oxford Uniuersio Press National Sound Archive, and the Bodleian and Christ Church British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Libraries for all their help. The Department of Education and W'hitehead, Kate. Science was generous in providing me with special travel grants The Third Progranrnre: a literary histov. and allowances, as was Christ Church and the English Faculty of - (Oxford English monographs). the University of Oxford. I. Great Britain. Broadcasting seruices. British Broadcasting Corporation. Radio I I am grateful to the following for kind permission to use seruices. Third Progranm~e,to 1970 material and to quote from copyright sources: the BBC, Frederick I. 7i'tle Bradnum, the iate Dougias Cleverdon, Patric Dickinson, Harman 384.1414'094' ISBN 0-19-812893-2 Grisewood, Professor Peter Laslett, the late John Lehmann, Ved Mehta, Mail Newspapers PLC, A. D. Peters and Co. Ltd. (for I,ibray of Congress Catalogin8 in Publication Data permission to reprint the letters of J. B. Priestley, C. Day Lewis, W'hitehead, Kate. and Rebecca West), P. H. Newby, Punch Magazine, the Society of 7.h~Third Progranrnre: a liferay histoylKate K'hitehead. p. cr.-- (Oxjord English monographs) Authors (on behalf of the Bernard Shaw Estate), Christopher Biblio~rapb~:p. Includes index. Storm-Clark, Harvey Unna and Stephen Durbridge Ltd. (on Great r. British Broadrastiyq Corporation. ?'bird Progranlnre. 2. Radio and littrature behalf of the Giles Cooper Estate), John Wain, A. P. Watt Ltd. Britain. 1. Radio pro~qramr-Great Britain. 4. Radio authorship. 1. 7'itle. 11. Title: 3rd Prqqramnre. 111. .Series. (on behalf of Ved Mehta), Valerie Eliot and Faber & Faber Ltd. ,791.J~,?Z'O~JI - drr9 P~~I~~I.~.I~JI~"~J1988 88-9891 (on behalf of the T. S. Eliot Estate). ISBN o-19-812893-2 Lastly I would like to thank friends and relatives for all their support and encouragement. Typeset by Graphicraft Typesetters Printed in Great Britain by Btddlcs Ltd. Guildford 6 King's Lynn fN IqqL V' L.Sbl'l 5 i qsy 3 4 The Network I The Working Structtrre 3 1 shown later in Chapters 6 and 7). Briefly it can be said that producer regarded his or her relationship with outside writers. He features were usually based on a theme rather than a dramatic lists a number of writers which he labels as 'mine' because he was plot, and therefore tended towards a more documentary style, responsible for commissioning and producing their work; they although there were many exceptions to this definition. Features were almost his protigis: 'as an outside writer of Features scripts, also had a Head, Laurence Gilliam, who presided over the George Orwell was exclusively mine' as were Angus Wilson, department during most of the Third Programme's existence Laurie Lee, Henry Reed, and Muriel Spark.26 until he died in I 964 and the department itself was closed. Gilliam Features producers were encouraged to enlist the talents of was largely responsible for the enormous success of the radio outside writers, partly because the feature was regarded as radio's feature in the post-war years, and, as Cleverdon's description own art-form, and 'the department was, keen to experiment. There shows, he was a popular figure, at least amongst producers in his was occasionally some disagreement between the editorial and department: supply departments over the use of 'outsiders'. The editorial staff A man of wide-ranging interests and of inspiring integrity; he was seemed to prefer using outside writers as much as possible, whilst compassionate and courageous, and would always back a project that producers were usually keen to use their own work or that of had a chance of success rather than reject one that might fail. He was also their colleagues. On one occasion Grisewood voiced his an- a bon viveur, unpunctual, extremely good company, and a tower of noyance with this state of affairs: 'The Third Programme is too strength to his subordinates. To him mainly is due the development of much regarded as an outlet for the wayward inspiration of the features as a radio form.23 otherwise thwarted staff script writer.'27 The system for offering features material to the planners was The Assistant Head of Features was D. G. Bridson, who wrote similar to that used in Drama Department, although there was no a personal account of his involvement in the BBC, Prospero and official liaison producer, just 'a small cell inside the Department, Ariel. In it he gives a succinct description of how decisions were whose main business it will be to stimulate and work out Feature made within the department, a matter of some importance ideas for the Third Pr~gramrne'.~BThus a number of features became of the frequently controversial content of feature pro- producers became known as Third Programme producers, grammes. The producer was responsible for 'all questions of bad because the major part of their work was broadcast by that taste, political bias or any other policy matter'. If he or she was in network. They were Michael Barsley, D. G. Bridson, Douglas doubt, the Head of the department was consulted. Really serious Cleverdon, Francis Dillon, Rayner Heppenstall, Louis MacNeice, matters would then be referred to the Controller of Entertain- Stephen Potter, and W. R. Rodgers. The Third Programme had ment or Director of the Spoken Word, and on up the chain to, specific requirements from Features Department which it set out finally, the Director-General.24 at the beginning: an experimental 'Radio Workshop' piece once The major difference between the roles of producer in Drama every four weeks, a one- to two-hour feature once a fortnight, and and producer in Features was that the latter was usually employed a thirty-minute 'literary or satirical' once a fortnight.29 as a writer as well. Douglas Cleverdon described how one usually The Controllers also seemed quite clear about the type of began as a free-lance writer and was then employed as a staff feature that was required, to judge from the number of forthright writer-producer: 'one would start with producing one's own rejections of suggestions submitted by Features Department. scripts, then progress to doing more elaborate ones, perhaps Even offers made by prestigious 'Third' producers were written by outside writers7.25 Rayner Heppenstall's autobio- graphy gives some interesting insights as to how a features 26 Rayner Heppenstall, Portrait oftbe Artist as a Professioonal Man (London: Peter Owen, 2' Cleverdon, 'The Art of Radio in Britain 1922-66' (TS of unpublished monograph 1969) 23. lent by the author), fo. jr. 27 WAC, RI~/IL~~/J,j July 1948. 28 WAC, RI~/IZ~~/I,31 May 1946. 24 Bridson, Prospero and Ariel, pp. 1oj -6. 25 Cleverdon interview. 29 Ibid., 16 Jan. 1946. The Working Strt/cttrre 4'3 The Network 41 already been written. It will be seen later how on other occasions Cooper's letter to McWhinnie two days after the broadcast indicates that he was very pleased with it: that editorial role became much more substantial in less clear-cut cases. Cooper's later plays were in fact the subject of considerable I would like to congratulate you on your production of Mathry Third Programme editorial discussion, if not interference, despite Beacon. My general feeling was that perhaps a better play might their apparent success with the critics. have been written on this theme, but not by me, which is probably as near as one ought to get to self-satisfaction. It could not have been better produced. Thank-you.42 FEATURE CASE-STUDY The BBC must also have been very pleased with the play as it was By I 9 j j Henry Reed had become a very popular (in Third the first Drama Department entry for the Prix Italia and the first Programme terms) writer of satirical features. He was also a well- from any department to steal the coveted prize from Features known poet and a translator of European drama, in particular of Department. Indeed the number of repeats of Matdry Beacon itself the plays of Ugo Betti. He had written a series of amusing linked indicates the play's success and reveals that for Cooper it provided features on the subject of the imaginary 'composeress' Hilda a quite substantial income. On top of the EI I j. 10s. (-/;yo() for Tablet and her literary and musical milieu, which were, in effect, the original performance, Cooper received E j 7.