So to Speke

When not at work on our new old houseโ€”where the floorboards are up in anticipation of central heatingโ€”we are on the road and down narrow country lanes to get our calloused hands on the pieces of antique furniture that we acquired, in 21st-century style, by way of online auction. In order to create the illusion that we are getting out of the house, rather than just something into it, and to put our own restoration project into a perspective from which it looks more dollhouse than madhouse, we make stopovers at nearby National Trust properties like Chirk Castle or Speke Hall.

The latter (pictured here) is a Tudor mansion that, like some superannuated craft, sits sidelined along Liverpoolโ€™s John Lennon Airport, formerly known as RAF Speke. The architecture of the Hall, from the openings under the eaves that allowed those within to spy on the potentially hostile droppers-in without to the hole into which a Catholic priest could be lowered to escape Protestant persecution, bespeaks a history of keeping mum.

Situated though it is far from Speke, and being fictional besides, what came to mind was Audley Court, a mystery house with a Tudor past and Victorian interior that served as the setting of Mary Elizabeth Braddonโ€™s sensational crime novel Lady Audleyโ€™s Secret. The hugely popular thriller was first serialized beginning in 1861 and subsequently adapted for the stage. Resuscitated for a ten-part serial currently aired on BBC Radio 4, the eponymous โ€œladyโ€โ€”a gold digger, bigamist, and arsonist whose ambitions are famously diagnosed as the mark of โ€œlatent insanityโ€โ€”can now be eavesdropped on as she, sounding rather more demure than she appeared to my mindโ€™s ear when reading the novel, attempts to keep up appearances, even if it means having to make her first husband, a gold digger in his own right, disappear down a well.

As if the house, Audley Court, did not have a checkered past of its ownโ€”

a house in which you incontinently lost yourself if ever you were so rash as to attempt to penetrate its mysteries alone; a house in which no one room had any sympathy with another, every chamber running off at a tangent into an inner chamber, and through that down some narrow staircase leading to a door which, in its turn, led back into that very part of the house from which you thought yourself the furthest; a house that could never have been planned by any mortal architect, but must have been the handiwork of that good old builder, Time, who, adding a room one year, and knocking down a room another year, [ … ] had contrived, in some eleven centuries, to run up such a mansion as was not elsewhere to be met with throughout the county […].

โ€œOf course,โ€ the narrator insists,

in such a house there were secret chambers; the little daughter of the present owner, Sir Michael Audley, had fallen by accident upon the discovery of one. ย A board had rattled under her feet in the great nursery where she played, and on attention being drawn to it, it was found to be loose, and so removed, revealed a ladder, leading to a hiding-place between the floor of the nursery and the ceiling of the room belowโ€”a hiding-place so small that he who had hid there must have crouched on his hands and knees or lain at full length, and yet large enough to contain a quaint old carved oak chest, half filled with priests’ vestments, which had been hidden away, no doubt, in those cruel days when the life of a man was in danger if he was discovered to have harbored a Roman Catholic priest, or to have mass said in his house.

Loose floorboards weโ€™ve got plenty in our own domicile, and room enough for a holy manhole below. It being a late-Victorian townhouse, though, the hidden story we laid bare is that of the upstairs-downstairs variety. At the back, in the part of the house where the servants labored and lived, there once was a separate staircase, long since dismantled. It was by way of those steep steps that the maid, having performed her chores out of the familyโ€™s sight and earshot, withdrew, latently insane or otherwise, into the modest quarters allotted to her.

I wonder whether she read Lady Audleyโ€™s Secret, if indeed she found time to read at all, and whether she read it as a cautionary tale or an inspirational oneโ€”as the story of a woman who dared to rewrite her own destiny:

No more dependency, no more drudgery, no more humiliations,โ€ Lucy exclaimed secretly, โ€œevery trace of the old life melted awayโ€”every clue to identity buried and forgottenโ€”except […]

… that wedding ring, wrapped in paper.  Itโ€™s enough to make a priest turn in his hole.

โ€œI pulled and she shookโ€: A Dรฉcor to Try Oneโ€™s Decorum

My dog, Montague, demonstrating his wallpaper training in response to my stripping

All right, so Iโ€™m sounding like an aging burlesque queen about to toss her tassels and turn in the G-string that is a turn-on no longerโ€”but, by Gypsy, I am tired of stripping. Wallpaper, I mean. This old Mazeppa has nothing but a scraper for a gimmick, and the only hand she ever got for all her grinding is a mighty sore one. I just could not live with it, though, that dreadful patternโ€”having it stare me down in defiance, berate me for letting myself be defeated by all the work that needs doing in the old house we plan on inhabiting before long. The idea (not mine, mind) was to paint over itโ€”but I scratched that faster than I could scrape. It might peep out from behind the paint, that ghastly design. It might start to creep up on me if I donโ€™t get at it firstโ€”just like in that most famous of all interior decorating nightmares, Charlotte Perkins Gilmanโ€™s โ€œYellow Wallpaperโ€ (1892). To date, Gilmanโ€™s feminist tale of terror is the most convincing argument for taking it all off.

To the tormented soul telling the story, the paper she finds in her roomโ€”the room in which she is meant to restโ€”becomes a โ€œconstant irritant.โ€ Within a few short weeks of studying it, for want of the intellectual activity denied to her, she is driven to the distraction once classified as hysteria:

The color is hideous enough, and unreliable enough, and infuriating enough, but the pattern is torturing.ย 

You think you have mastered it, but just as you get well underway in following, it turns a back-somersault and there you are. It slaps you in the face, knocks you down, and tramples upon you. It is like a bad dream.

Unlike the blank, โ€œdeadโ€ paper on which she writes in secret, the wallpaper is teeming with life, just below the surface. It is the surface of conventions that Gilman tears down with a vengeance:

This bed will not move!

I tried to lift and push it until I was lame, and then I got so angry I bit off a little piece at one cornerโ€”but it hurt my teeth.

Then I peeled off all the paper I could reach standing on the floor. It sticks horribly and the pattern just enjoys it! All those strangled heads and bulbous eyes and waddling fungus growths just shriek with derision!

When Gilman’s story was adapted for US radio, listeners to CBSโ€™s Suspense program may have felt rather differently about this schizophrenic battle when, in a broadcast that aired on 29 July 1948, it was enacted by Agnes Moorehead, who, in tackling the part, had to struggle as well with our memories of the neurotic and disagreeable Mrs. Elbert Stevenson, her most famous Suspense role. โ€œSorry, Wrong Paper,โ€ I kept thinking as I witnessed the disintegration. And yet, as the hard and cutting echoes of Mrs. Stevenson suggest, paper can beat both rock and scissorsโ€”a thought that filled me with renewed terror.

โ€œIt dwells in my mind so!โ€ Gilmanโ€™s character remarks, tellingly, about the dreaded wall covering. The dwelling has overmastered the dweller, like a wild animal resisting domestication, a beast beyond paper training. The prospect of being dominated or possessed in this way by a questionable dรฉcor is a scenario horrifying enough for me to put penknife to paper . . . and keep stripping.

Dream Like Petrocelli

The presumably out-of-date with which I choose to concern myself in this journal cannot be expected to have an air of minty freshness about it; but by now broadcastellan is beginning to smell downright musty. Still, I cannot quite muster the energy to attend to the cobwebs in which this nugatory niche is shrouded. The state of neglect is owing to the dust that has enveloped my carcass of late. For the past three weeks or so, we have been engrossed in the project of renovating a late-Victorian house we intend on calling home in a few short weeks from now, or whenever the central heating and at least one of the bathrooms are installed.

Each day, it is becoming a little easier for me to see past the rubble and imagine myself lolling there, keeping up with past in the leisurely and blissfully inconsequential manner to which I have become so readily accustomed. Until that can happen, though, I shall have to go back, again and again, to scrape floors, strip wallpaper, and remove whatever trace we find of those who lived in there immediately before us, all the while uncovering the more distant past they deemed it fit to hide behind layers of outmoded modernity.

Aside from the dirt and the all too apparent signs of aging, the only thing I seem to have in common with this place is the state of being pre-occupied. It isnโ€™t the work alone and the costs involved that weigh on my mind. It is my own history of habitation on which I feel compelled to dwell. I am reminded of the time when my father decided to get us out of that working class neighborhood whose drabness and influx of foreign workers must have seemed a stigma to him but that was to prepubescent me the only world I knew . . . and one shared by a great many kids my age.

Sure, the prospect of having, for the first time in my life, a room of my own was exciting; but the move, some fifteen miles from where I had grown up, came at a great price . . . including the loss of my ability to communicate, to make myself understood and others laugh (something that was important to me, being that I felt too short to be good at much else). Regional dialects were very pronounced back then in Germany; and moving even that short distance meant that I could barely follow what folks were saying, let alone lead them in laughter. I remember our neighbor asking my sister and me whether we had come to help our father build the house. โ€œYes,โ€ I said, expectantly. I thought the man had just offered me a couple of peaches. Thatโ€™s how it sounded to me, anyhow. Life wasn’t going to be a bowl of fruit.

For my parents, it was the picket fence dream coming true (without the picket fence, mind you, which is an American clichรฉ). Still, being working class, no matter how hard we tried to come across otherwise, meant that the house was coming along only graduallyโ€”which is why my mother could relate to Petrocelli.

Petrocelli was a mid-1970s crime drama, and a pretty formulaic one at that. The action unfolded in flashbacks, from crime to prosecution; but it always ended in the presentโ€”and that present was a construction site. After each case, defense lawyer Petrocelli went to inspect the progress on his new home, the one his job helped to build. Week after week, there was little noticeable change, a state of incompletion that made it easy for my mother to identify with the frustrated ambitions of the titular character.

As for myself, I felt it difficult to relate to anything or anyone back then. Everything was unfamiliar and new (even the ledgers I had filled with pictures and stories had been discarded during the move), and apart from the promise of having that room to myself, nothing seemed worth the trouble of giving up so much of what had felt like home to me, no matter how it might have looked to a status-conscious adult.

To this day, putting tens and hundreds of thousands into a single project like building or doing up a house is troubling to me. Rather than the financial risk and the potential hardship it poses, it is the peril it can mean to oneโ€™s sense of home. You see, the house my father built was never to become our home. It meant the end of our familyโ€”the end of all family activities for which there was no money left in the budget, the end of my parentsโ€™ marriage and, ultimately albeit indirectly, my fatherโ€™s life.

In retrospect, that new houseโ€”the dream of being a four-walled somebodyโ€”looks an awful lot like a Petrocelli flashback . . . a wrong move and a slow process of undoing.

A Half-Dollar and a Dream: Arthur Miller, Scrooge, and a โ€œbig pile of French copperโ€

The currency market has been giving me a headache. The British pound is anything but sterling these days, which, along with our impending move and the renovation project it entails, is making a visit to the old neighborhood seem more like a pipe dream to me. The old neighborhood, after all, is some three thousand miles away, on the Upper East Side of Manhattan; and even though I have come to like life here in Wales, New York is often on my mind. You donโ€™t have to be an inveterate penny-pincher to be feeling the pressure of the economic squeeze. I wonder just how many dreams are being deferred for lack of funding, dreams far greater than the wants and desires that preoccupy those who, like me, are hardly in dire straits.

Back in March 1885, Joseph Pulitzer was doing his part to make such a larger-than-life dream a reality when he tried to raise funds for the erection of the Statue of Liberty. In one of his most sentimental plays for radio, Arthur Miller told the story through the eyes of a soldier and his miserly grandfatherโ€”Millerโ€™s Scrooge.

Broadcast on 26 March 1945, โ€œGrandpa and the Statueโ€ is announced as a โ€œwarm, human story of the most famous pinup girl in the world.โ€ Miller claimed that he โ€œcould not bearโ€ to write just โ€œanother Statue of Liberty showโ€ designed to โ€œillustrate how friendly we are with France and how the Statue of Liberty will stand forever as a symbol of a symbol and so on.โ€ As I put it in my dissertation, the Dickensian comedy he wrote instead โ€œis a nostalgic response to the publicโ€™s growing World War-weariness and the prospects of international unity and concord after Yalta.โ€

As the play opens, a wounded American soldier, recovering in a hospital room with a view of New York Harbor, recalls how his grandfatherโ€”โ€œMerciless Monaghan,โ€ the โ€œstingiest man in Brooklynโ€ got โ€œall twisted up with the Statue of Liberty.โ€ Old Monaghan (played by Charles Laughton) refused to make a contribution to the Statue Fund and, for decades to come, stubbornly defended his position until, one day, his grandson entreats him to take a ferry to Bedloeโ€™s Island:

GRANDPA. What I canโ€™t understand is what all these people see in that statue that theyโ€™ll keep a boat like this full makinโ€™ the trip, year in year out. ย To hear the newspapers talk, if the statue was gone weโ€™d be at war with the nation that stole her the followinโ€™ morninโ€™ early. ย All it is is a big pile of French copper.

YOUNG MONAGHAN. The teacher says it shows us that we got liberty.

GRANDPA. Bah! If youโ€™ve got liberty you donโ€™t need a statue to tell you you got it; and if you havenโ€™t got liberty no statueโ€™s going to do you any good tellinโ€™ you you got it. It was a criminal waste of the peopleโ€™s money.ย 

Among the visitors to Bedloe Island is a veteran of the Spanish-American War. Celebrating the birthday of his fallen brother by visiting the โ€œonly stone heโ€™s got,โ€ the veteran convinces the old man that the โ€œstatue kinda looks like what we believe.โ€

Profoundly moved, Monaghan asks to be left alone while inspecting the inscription at the base of the statue: 

GRANDPA (to himself). โ€œGive me your tired, your poor, your huddled
masses . . .โ€

(Music: Swells from a sneak to full, then under to background.)

YOUNG MONAGHAN. I ran over and got my peanuts and stood there cracking them open, looking around. And I happened to glance over to grampa. He had his nose right up to that bronze tablet, reading it. And then he reached into his pocket and kinda spied around over his eyeglasses to see if anybody was looking, and then he took out a coin and stuck it in a crack of cement over the tablet.

(Biz: Coin falling onto concrete.)

YOUNG MONAGHAN. It fell out and before he could pick it up I got a look at it. It was a half a buck. He picked it up and pressed it into the crack so it stuck. And then he came over to me and we went home.

(Music: Changes to stronger, more forceful theme.)

Thatโ€™s why, when I look at her now through this window, I remember that time and that poem [. . .].

Unlike the published script (as it appeared in the 1948 anthology Plays from Radio), the broadcast play concludes with the last lines of Emma Lazarusโ€™s famous if oft misquoted sonnet โ€œThe New Colossus.โ€

I am highly critical of Arthur Miller in Etherized Victorians; but, for all its sentimental propagandizing, โ€œGrandpa and the Statueโ€ is one of Millerโ€™s most affecting plays for the medium. As I read and listen to it now, so far away from New York City, I get a little wistful; and yet, the message is not lost on me, either, as I think of the larger picture, the ideals worth our investment, and the funds unreplenished, that makes my pouting for a few weeks in the Big Apple seem downright petty. Besides, I’ve got the airwaves to carry me through and keep me buoyant when I go “Oh, boy.”


Related recordings
โ€Grandpa and the Statue 26 March 1945

Related writings
“Politics and Plumbing” (Arthur Millerโ€™s โ€œPussycatโ€)
โ€œArthur Miller Asks Americans to โ€˜Listen for the Sound of Wingsโ€™”
โ€œArthur Miller Unleashes a Pussycatโ€

Gong-ho: A Time-Delayed Cheer for Going Live

There was a time when much of what was on the air, first on radio, then on television, was live. Whatever drama unfolded, it played out on a stage the size of a nation. Nowadays, only breaking news can arrest our promiscuous gazeโ€”the rest will have to wait until we are ready to take it in. With all the technology at our fingertips, we are in danger of losing that sense of sharing and partaking that is live theater. In an age when we can communicate with one another instantly while on the go, we are far less inclined to sit down and make time for anyone speaking to or performing for us. Sure, we all got our home theatersโ€”but we pride ourselves on being able to determine just when the curtain is going up.

Broadcasters got wary of going live, and audiences are weary of waiting for the end of the commercial breaks that have gotten way longer than our attention span. Does anyone still watch American Idol without recording it first? I donโ€™t have that option, mind, being that, here in Britain, the program is shown a day or two after it airs on Fox; but I surely could not be asked to set aside two hours for what amounts to, what, forty minutes of entertainment?

The only programming format not in danger of getting canned is the call-in, the kind of theatrical presentation that depends for its drama on the audienceโ€™s possibility of getting in on the act. You might say that audience participation programs like Stop the Music spelled the end of comedy on radio; but, aside from greed, what kept listeners glued to their sets was a sense of urgency and immediacy, of being in the here and now when it mattered, of tuning in at just the time when being live could change your life.

Seventy-five years ago, a man called Major Edward Bowes created a sensation by exploiting that very concept: give the audience a say, turn them into voters and judges, leave them with the impression that, should they chose to do so, they, too, could be on that stage, and phones will start ringing. The Amateur Hour, heard locally in 1934 on New York station WHNโ€”of which the Major was the directorโ€”went national on 24 March 1935. “You within sound of my voice are just as much part of this show as the youngsters that come to the microphone,” the Major insisted, urging listeners to “telephone [their] choice, telephone early, telephone often. You decide the winners, and the winners will receive immediate professional engagement.”

And call they did. According to the June 1936 issue of Radioland, the program

brought a rush of business to the telephone company, which had to install 200 special lines to handle the vast volume of incoming phone calls registering the preferences of voters on the Majorโ€™s talent. Ordinarily this might seem to be a nice piece of business for the late Mr. Bells concern, but company officials earnestly deprecate any such assumption. Very few nickels roll into their coffers, they explain, for most of the incoming calls are placed by subscribers who are entitled to a minimum number of calls per month as part of their service charge. Be this as it may, thereโ€™s something heartening to watch 200 nimble-fingered young women registering votes quicker than you can say โ€œMajor Bowesโ€โ€”all to the fatalistic end that a yodeler or a man who extracts music from a saw may have his chance at fame.

On that first national broadcast, at least, on the first anniversary broadcast (24 March 1935), the yodeler got the gong. “You mustn’t applaud too long,” the Major good-naturedly admonished the studio audience. “He was through the Boer War and we went through one of his yodels. So, it’s even-steven.” Winners during that first season included the Duchess of Torlonia, a Singing Garbage Man, a Chinese Hillbilly, and some Texas Cowboys from Norwich, Connecticut. The oldest contestant was 110.

Since the phone company had no stake in the matter, listeners could cast multiple votes with one call. Radio Guide put this to the test when, its representative claiming to be one of sixty-seven listeners at the Sinai Temple in Mount Vernon, New York, was able to cast sixty-seven votes all at once. The amateur for whom he voted was one Orville Edwards, an undercover Radio Guide reporter posing as a โ€œcorn-fed tenorโ€ to investigate the audition process, which, from writing the application to being on the program, lasted a mere three weeks. Proving that โ€œballot-stuffingโ€ was part of the game, Edwards came in third on the 23 February 1936 broadcast.

โ€œThe wheel of fortune spins,โ€ Edward quipped, imitating the words made famous by Major Bowes, โ€œโ€˜Round and round she goes, and where she stops, nobody knowsโ€”except the Major, and Radio Guide.

The Major and his minions were amateurs compared to the folks operating Dame Fortuneโ€™s wheel these days. Whether or not every vote counts, they make sure that it costs. Meanwhile, the results, however quickly they are tallied, are being reported at a dayโ€™s delay.

I guess we owe it to the less than choice ingredients, and a ladle now firmly in the hands of those who hunger for profits, if we are no longer feasting together at the community table. Itโ€™s a pity, really. Canned goods may be convenient; but we are missing out on the flavor of the moment.


Related writings
โ€œA-spinning goes our weekly wheel of fortune . . .”
โ€Back in the X Factory; or, the Legacy of Major Bowesโ€

Hand a Swellhead a Pin and Heโ€™ll Make It His Scepter

Personally, your editors don’t like Mr. Welles. He is the seven-year-old kid next door who has a vocabulary twice his size. He is the good-looking young man who walks off with your best girl. He is the braggart who says impossible things and then does them. Your editors are average people. Thatโ€™s why they personally are not fond of the man who is too good and knows it and shows it! . . . Your editors donโ€™t like him because everything he does is perfect, from movies to radio plays. But heโ€™s good, drat it, he is!

That is what the readers of a May 1941 issue Movie-Radio Guide were being told about the most talked about man in radioโ€”Orson Welles.

I wouldn’t be surprised if this backhanded compliment had been dictated by the erstwhile Wunderkind himself. However uneven his career, however fickle his fortunes in Hollywood, the kid from Kenosha kept the conceit of his genius alive on the radio, which, immediate and expedient, proved just the medium for putting on airs.

In March of 1943, when comedian Jack Benny was unable to carry on with his weekly broadcasts, Welles was chosen to fill in for “old sniffle snoot.” The format of the Grape Nuts Flakes Program remained intact, and Jackโ€™s gang was at hand to become foilsโ€”or fodderโ€”for the theatrical showman-thespian.

Now, Benny had pretty much perfected the comedy of deflation by creating the persona of a pompous, vain, miserly and slightly delusional performer at whose character flaws listeners felt at ease to laugh even if the act held a distorting mirror to them by accentuating their own failings. It was not so with Welles, for whom self-deflation seemed to have been just another means of boosting his ego.

Whereas Benny presents us with a caricature whose features are not unlike some of our own, Wellesโ€™s persona was always larger than life, and as such untouchable. โ€œI have spent years inflating the balloon that is Welles,โ€ the guest tells Benny regular Dennis Day: โ€œPlease do not puncture it.โ€ Fat chance, really.

On the 21 March 1943 broadcast, Welles was not so much filling in for Benny as he was filling up the studio with his aura, dimming the sunny atmosphere by shrouding it in layers of Orson. It might be a gasโ€”but, aside from Welles’s hilarious take on the Grape-Nuts commercialโ€”it isn’t quite nitrous oxide. As Simon Callow puts it in Orson Welles: Hello Americans,

[p]art of the problem is that, unlike the Jack Benny character, which is preposterous and bears no relations to the real man, this โ€œOrson Wellesโ€ is uncomfortably close to the real one: are we laughing at or with him?

Indeed, the โ€œballoonโ€ act seems โ€œself-serving,โ€ an advertisement for what could be too readily taken for the man himself. Aided by Bennyโ€™s writers, Welles in his grandeur does not have to suffer one scratch from Mary Livingstoneโ€™s barbs (“Gee, I like this guy”) or Eddie Andersonโ€™s retorts (“Mr. Welles, working for you is paradise”). Being that the entire act revolves around him, none of his fellow players gets an opportunity to cut him down to any size other than super. The familiar casting skit, in which Welles rehearses a scene that gives none beside him a chance to get a word in, works far better on the Fred Allen Show, where one genius was pitted against another, where the war of the words and the battle for a line becomes a genuine sparring match.

โ€œOrson Welles is a genius,โ€ Don Wilson concludes the broadcast, โ€œbut this program was written by Bill Morrow and Ed Beloin.โ€ That remark, drowned out by the applause from the studio audience is about the only jab at Welles, who was known for taking all the credit. No, the โ€œballoon that is Wellesโ€ was not in danger of popping, โ€œprickโ€ being a noun in this case. If only Welles had permitted himselfโ€”or been permitted by those who helped to fashion and fix his personaโ€”to accept the pin without turning it into a scepter.


Related recordings
Grape Nuts Flakes Program, 21 March 1943

East If With Eagle

For the reward of a single dollar, readers of Movie-Radio Guide used to send in โ€œbonersโ€โ€”fluffed or unintentionally funny lines they had caught on the air. On 29 Feburary 1940, for instance, Olive Doeling of Petaluma, California, tuned in to station KGO and heard Benny Walker (Benny Walker?) say: “Wish you could see her, folks. She’s lugging a saxophone almost as big as she is behind her.โ€ Another buck went to a listener from Jackson, Mississippi, who reported the following exchange between Major Bowes and a contestant on his Amateur Hour broadcast from 7 June 1936:

CONTESTANT. I was a dressmakerโ€™s model and then I married.
MAJOR. Wholesale or retail?

Reading lines like these makes me want to tune in the original program, to find the recording and hear for myself.

The other day, when I read that Mary Livingstone was supposed to have giggled โ€œJack, Iโ€™ll never forget the look on that ski house when it saw your face,โ€ I wondered whether that was indeed what she had said and how her husband, the cast, and the studio audience had responded. Listening to a recording of the 25 February 1940 broadcast of the Jell-O Program, I heard no such fluff. โ€œIโ€™ll never forget the impression on your face when you crashed in the ski house,โ€ Livingstone said instead. Had J. N. Lawrence from San Diego earned that dollar? Was the โ€œbonerโ€ bona fide or bogus?

Well, before accusing any of those tuners-in, I had to remind myself that many of the live programs of the past were staged twiceโ€”once for the East Coast, then for the West. What J. N. Lawrence had picked up on California was not what anyone living East could have heardโ€”or anyone listening to a recording of the East Coast broadcast.

How different the two broadcast could be was demonstrated on 20 March 1940, when a certain Mr. Ramshaw caused a riot on the Fred Allen Show. Mr. Ramshaw was a celebrated Golden Eagle who toured the US with his British trainer, falconer Captain C. W. R. Knight. The Captain was encouraged by Allen to let the Mr. Ramshaw fly around in the studio; but, as it turned out, he had little success in convincing the bird to return to him as rehearsedโ€”and not until he had left his mark on the members of the audience assembled in studio 8-H, Radio City, New York.

Actually, as Allen recalled in Treadmill to Oblivion, Mr. Ramshaw had narrowly “missed the shoulder of a student who had come down from Fordham University to advise [Allen] that [he] had won a popularity poll at the school.”

Responding to a complaint from the vice president of NBC, a less than apologetic Allen remarked: “i thought i had seen about everything in radio but the eagle had a trick up his feathered colon that was new to me,” to which he added: “i know you await with trepidation the announcement that i am going to interview sabu with his elephant some week.”

There was no getting back to the script that evening; and the commotion that ensued was another forceful reminder that, for all his talent as a writer, Allen was in even finer feather when he did not have to stick to the ink from his mechanized quill. Now, winging it, or flying by the seat of oneโ€™s pants, was not condoned by those who footed the bill of comedy-variety programs and kept an eagle eye on their production. Everything had to be performed as scriptedโ€”and strictly within the time allotted for each number, sketch, and broadcast.

So, when Allen had to repeat his program three hours laterโ€”at midnightโ€”for the West Coast audience, the spokesperson of Young and Rubicam, the advertising agency working on behalf of the showโ€™s sponsor, did not permit Mr. Ramshaw to make an encore. The segment was out, and, as Stuart Hample (author of โ€œall the sincerity in hollywoodโ€ told Max Schmid in a 4 November 2001 interview over WBAI, New York, Allen was forced to revise the script and remove the offending segment.

Allen defended his feathered guest by claiming that Mr. Ramshaw had resented the censor’s “dictatorial order” and, “deprived by nature of the organs essential in the voicing of an audible complaint, called upon his bowels to wreck upon us his reaction to [Mr. Royal’s] martinet ban.”

The feather “l’affaire eagle” added to Allen’s cap never got to tickle his West Coast listeners. Network radio programs may have had a coast-to-coast audience; but, be it an eagle, a turkey, or a lark, some of what took off or managed to escape in the East could never fly or land in the West.


Related recordings
Fred Allen Show, 20 March 1940

โ€œ. . . a world between two soundsโ€; or, the Librarian Who Turned Up the Volume(s)

I could not have faulted anyone for brushing me off with a terse โ€œnone of your lip,โ€ considering that my kisser had taken on the appearance of an over-boiled frankfurter abandoned during a picnic invaded by flesh-eating ants. 

Luckily, sight at the time mattered less than sound, and the painkillers had not entirely divested me of whatever powers of articulating my ideas I yet possess. Yesterday morning, during a meeting with administrators at the local university, interest was once again expressed in a course I had proposed a few years earlier. I fancifully titled it โ€œWriting for the Ear,โ€ which was meant to distinguish the module from more traditional classes in radio writing as they are still being taught here in Britain.

I had previously turned down an offer to teach a course in writing for the medium, as I have no experience in developing scripts aimed at those in charge of productions at the BBC.

Besides, todayโ€™s technology makes it possible for anyone to have a voice in the forum, to podcast talks and engage in sonic experimentation. With these opportunities in mind, I outlined a course exploring the relationship between the spoken and the written that would make those who express themselves typographically alive of the value of sounds and the potentialities of silences.

Too much of the most eloquent prose and sonorous poetry is being silenced. Words written hundreds of years ago are still being pored over, but they are far less frequently voiced and heard. In classroom and study, printed words are scrutinized, paraphrased, underlined, crossed out, and annotated; they are dissected like so many toads in the imaginary garden, well before they get a chance to let out a single distinctive croak.

Lending your own voice to written lines is an act of resuscitationโ€”of breathing life into the thoughts of those who came before you, of triggering a startling echo in what was assumed to be a soundproof vault. Silences, too, speak volumes, especially when they enter into a dialogue with the spoken and the sounded.

Someone who had a lot to say on the subject of the word made sound was Archibald MacLeish, the Pulitzer Prize winning poet who, from 1939 to 1944 served as Librarian of Congress. Before being appointed Assistant Secretary of State for Public and Cultural Relations, MacLeish brought to radio a series of lectures titled The American Story. At a time of global conflict, the program was designed to emphasize

the experience in common of the American peoples, the story set down in the accounts of those who knew the American experience at first hand or were part of it. Whatever their race may have been, or their faith, or their language.

In other words, it took a scholarly approach to what Carmen Miranda accomplished in the conga line of duty. On this day, 18 March 1944, NBC presented โ€œBetween the Silence and the Surf,โ€ the eighth broadcast in the series. It related the settlement of the Americas, from Plymouth (as recorded by William Bradford in the 17th century) to Brazil (as documented by Lopez Vaz in the 1580s). I recently rediscovered the program while digitizing my collection of audio tapes; the published scripts, meanwhile, have been shared online. The printed words bespeak the poetโ€™s mission of giving voice to the lost and long unsounded, to lives shelved and shut away in our repositories of knowledge:

SOUND.ย  A slow surf, the hush of the waves withdrawing.

NARRATOR.ย  And the windโ€™s sound in the grass or in the brush or in the forests where they still must go.

SOUND.ย  The wind in the coarse grass and the solemn trees.

NARRATOR.ย  The world of the first settlements was the narrow world between the silence and the surf, between the water and the wildernessโ€”between the past cut off by water and the future closed by distance and by dangerโ€”but not closed.

According to the April 1944 issue of Radio Age, MacLeish โ€œpoured an immense amount of painstaking research,โ€ into this series; and in “addition to the laborious research and authentication,” he included the

most important fillipโ€”his own brilliant style of the prose poem, a style which has won for him the accolades of the literary world. Each line read on the broadcast is a part of this poetic narrative style, giving each program a dramatic sweep so necessary in producing the effect desired.

Yet while the poet claimed to have aimed at creating โ€œnew forms of radio expression,โ€ rather than adhering to the formats of โ€œconventional radio drama,โ€ critics were not uniformly enthusiastic, arguing the productions to be โ€œoverloaded with conversationโ€ and โ€œself-denyingly austere.โ€ Such gainsayings are representative of the bias toward dramatization and dialogue as opposed to lecture or oratory, no matter how many individual speakers were employed to deliver it.

In the foreword to the published scripts for the series, MacLeish defended his minimalist approach by reasoning that โ€œradioโ€™s unique function and unique opportunityโ€ was simply to convey speech instead of presenting words, โ€œartfully blendedโ€ by means of โ€œ[s]killful devices,โ€ to โ€œproduce dramatic effectsโ€:

Because radio is limited mechanically to sound, and particularly to the sound of speech, radio is capable of a concentration of speech itself, the text itself, which can give words a life and a significance they rarely achieve outside the printed pagesโ€”and which they achieve there only for the most gifted and fortunate readers.

The word, to MacLeish, was the beginning and the end. As a documentarian and poet, he inhabited that “world between two sounds,” listening, recording, and readying himself to speak with force and deliberation. His American Story is the story of humanity’s struggles for survival, for voice and representation.

Our daily existence, like that of the first settlers, is this โ€œnarrow world between the silence and the surf,โ€ between the calm and the roar, between tumult and tranquility.  Our lives are a string of moments waiting to be seized for having our say, periods of stillness, voluntary or imposed.  We may chronicle our times and leave behind piles of documents to be poured over or neglected by future generations; but it is the sound we make now and the space we leave for listening that define the present we must fill with meaning as we rage against the silence to which we are ultimately condemned . . .

What You Might Find While Down in the Mouth

If Iโ€™ve been keeping my trap shut lately, itโ€™s on account of some festering crumbs in my cake hole. Sure, I can jaw away about most anything, but Iโ€™ve got to have the mind and the mandible to do so. For days now I have been plagued by mouth ulcers that are putting a muzzle on my spiritsโ€”not the kind of oral culture I generally engage with in this journal. My gums are following economic trends, making me feel ever longer in the tooth. My left cheek, in turn, might lead you to believe that, in an effort to dodge the downturn, I managed to squirrel something away for a day on which I may mercifully hide my mug under an umbrella. Meanwhile, my taste buds have started to sprout and my lower lip, Angelina Jolied out of all proportions, is suggestive of a law suitable botch or a risk taken by the likes of Maxie Rosenbloom.

Always one to self-diagnose and over-the-counter medicate rather than to seek the professional opinion of someone who, like a satirist with a stethoscope, makes a career out of scrutinizing us at our most unsightly, I have been pondering my condition and its causes. Though I cannot rule out trauma resulting from vigorous brushing recently recommended by my hygienist, I am not inclined to blame my current state on the stress produced by our impending move; if I were quite so readily distressed, I would hardly have survived my previous transplantations. Besides, I have always resented being thought of as a mere tangle of nerves in need of careful rewiring.

I have a long history of allergies, though; and given that my symptoms began to occur following a dinner outing last week, it might well be that my sores are a reaction to something passing my lips that night. Heretofore, my catalogue of allergens has been limited to felines, grass, and dust. Now, that hasnโ€™t kept me from cat-sitting, of which you can make a career in New York City, or from relocating to one of the grassiest spots on the planet; and it certainly did little to convince me to take out the feather duster more often than the snot rag or the inhaler.

I was told early on by the still extant half of the temporary connubial unit responsible for my coming into beingโ€”and for getting the heck away from whence I hailโ€”that allergies are an aberrant mental state and that cycling to school through the cornfields or mowing the lawn were activities I could handle if I only put my mind to it. True, I have always been mildly allergic to physical labor; but that was in part due to the damage I saw it inflict on the body, the mind, and the spirit.

My fatherโ€™s religion was social Darwinism, in the practicing of which he drank himself to death. It would have been futile to convince him that an undistilled grain could be as lethal as a distilled one and that what doesnโ€™t kill you instantaneously does not necessarily make you any stronger in the long run.

I had not planned on delving into my personal history, medical or otherwise. As is often the case, such memories are squeezed out of me by the mere twisting of the dial. Listening to Fred Allenโ€™s 1937 St. Patrickโ€™s Day broadcast, I was reminded of the kind of book I would have liked to have thrown at certain parties aforementioned.

Fred Allen is always good for a few laughs, however painful their elicitation. Annotating his quips can prove more rewarding still. Well before the hosts of our present day chat shows, satirist Allen raided the daily news for his weekly radio programs. In his Town Hall News (โ€œsees nothing, shows allโ€), Allen commented on the goings-on in New York City, on politics, the economy, on culture high and low. Here is the first of the 17 March 1937 Town Hall News bulletins:

New York City, New York. Dr. R. P. Wodehouse, speaking at the American Institute of General Sciences, claims that hay fever and asthma are increasing in this country. Dr. Wodehouse says clearing up of native vegetation and its replacement by alien plants will add to number of victims.

Allenโ€™s reading of this news item is followed by a skit demonstrating the wide-ranging effect the predicted rise of allergic reactions might have on the afflicted urbanite. This time, though, I was more interested in Allenโ€™s source than in his take on it. My curiosity being immune to ulcers, I soon caught up on R. P. (no relation to P. G.) Wodehouse and his endeavors to โ€œwin the secret of a weedโ€™s plain heartโ€ (a quotation prefacing his 1945 study on Hay Fever Plants).

I wish R. P. Wodehouse had been a household name where I grew up; but, as the good doctor reminds me, by quoting John James Ingalls, โ€œgrassโ€ is the โ€œforgiveness of nature.โ€ Iโ€™ll have to learn to let it grow over my own family plotโ€”and concentrate instead on finding out how to avoid another catastrophic invasion of my oral flora. To cure my foul mood, a generous dose of Fred Allen is indicated . . .

Elbows and Audacity

Unlike my imperialist, Anschluss-eager ancestors, I am not anxious for Lebensraum, the supposed deficiency thereof justified many acts of ruthless expansion. If I lack living space, I tend to shrink-fit myself back into it; instead of elbowing my way out of a tight squeeze, I grab and ditch whatever the chosen niche cannot hold. The size of a pad has always been less important to me than its position or the pal who shares it. For much of my adult life I did not have as much as a closet to myself, let alone a room to call my own. Letting go of stuff has been both essential and elementary. True, I never possessed much that could not be replaced or that required ample room to place it in. A few photo albums, personal letters, and an old teddy bearโ€”little else of mine has double-crossed the Atlantic as I, the disloyal Teuton, migrated from the Rhineland to the East River, from Manhattan to rural Wales.

Perhaps, it is this sense of freedom from dead weight, this longing be without belongings that attracted me to the theater of the mind. Back in New York, crammed into small quarters I knew I had to vacate before long, I began to collect the immaterial, the non-stuff that gathers no dust: plays written for the ear, tales unfolding on the air. Practically all of them are now stored on a single laptop . . . except for that impractical drawer full of plastic cases, the magnetic tape that can only hold so much and, of itself, so little attraction. Audiocassettes, I mean.

A mere decade ago, when I was writing my PhD dissertation (at a โ€œdeskโ€ that doubled as a dining table), I had not yet caught on to the disencumbering economy known as mp3. Dozens of cassettes, purchased from various vendors of old-time radio recordings, were piling up in my digs, no matter how much I tried to preserve space by dubbing them from 60 to 120-minute tapes. To this day, many of those tapes still fill a large drawer, well out of earshot now that my Mac serves as my receiver, my library, and my annex.

Over the years, I have been able to replace many of them with digital recordings shared or sold online, albeit at a loss of fidelity. The ones that remain are of the rarer sort, the highbrow and experimental kind with which I set out to sell my study to academics reluctant to conceive of radio dramatics as literature. Most of these plays have been published on the paper that bestows upon them a watermark of distinctionโ€”a bias in favor of ink over air that bolstered my argument that the works of Archibald MacLeish, Alfred Kreymborg, Norman Corwin and Morton Wishengrad are indeed โ€œoral literature,โ€ an unfortunate oxymoron to which we resort when referring to the airborn(e) words whose life exceeds the margins of the printed page and the boundaries of the โ€œwooden O.โ€

Along with music and poetry, the boxed-in cassettes encase the voices of old friends, the sounds of distant places and past lives. To get them out of their timbered limbo I recently downloaded Audacity, software that converts old tape to new files. For the past two weeks now I have done little else besides dubbing, editing, merging tracks, removing imperfections and changing the speed of recordingsโ€”all with a single-minded diligence that leaves little room for doubt: you just canโ€™t get Germany out of this old boy.

And why save all this space now that we are about to move into a house roughly three times as large as the old one? Perhaps, I am not such a free spirit after allโ€”just too lazy-boned to lug all that excess baggage. Could it be that what elbow greaseless me appreciates most about being at play in the theater of the mind is that it does not require the shifting of scenery? Be that as it may: I hope shall not long lack the time to make room for the stale air that is my element and the out-of-dating that is my mรฉtier.