And, eventually, the radio stars responded “Enough!”
John Crosby was one of those columnists who complained about the sameness of some shows. And Benny finally said “Hold on a second.”
The result was Crosby’s column of January 6, 1949. Incidentally, Crosby wasn’t entirely negative about the Benny radio series and expressed his like for Jack in other columns.
Down With the Critics
By JOHN CROSBY
In the anniversary issue of "Variety," Jack Benny, the $2,260,000 comedian, has broken a lance over the skulls of radio critics, an easy target and one that hardly justifies the expense—lances being pretty expensive these days. If you over look the extravagance though, Mr. Benny has a pretty good point and, since I’ve temporarily run short of lances of my own and comedians to break them against, I thought I’d turn the place over to Benny for the day. (Since columnists haven’t as much space at their disposal as comedians, this has had to be drastically condensed.) Take it away, Mr. Benny.
“The past several years I’ve noticed radio editors gang up on radio comedians and accuse them of using the same type of humor year after year. Reviewers admit the comedians have top comedy shows, and funny programs. Their beef is the programs always use the same characters and situations.
“The battle cry seems to be, ‘The listeners want a change.’ But do they?
“Amos and Andy were public favorites in 1929. They still are. Eddie Cantor, Al Jolson, Fred Allen, Burns and Allen, have all ranked high in the Hoopers for a dozen years. These comics have spent years perfecting their individual comedy styles, and would be completely lost without them. Would the critics have George and Gracie darken their dialogue and Amos and Andy jump into domestic comedy? Bob Hope has a pace and brashness I envy. But I know that I’d be floundering in ‘flop-sweat’ if I tried Bob’s delivery. I do flatter myself into thinking Hope can’t get as much out of a ‘Well!!!’ as I do.
“It took seventeen years to develop the characters on my show. Each week we’ve tried to inject a new situation, idea, or character into our script. What happens? A reviewer comes along, says the show was great, the audience loved it, the script was hilarious. . . . BUT ... I was the same stingy, toupee-topped, faulty fiddler; Mary was still snippy; Phil continued as a fugitive from Alcoholics Anonymous; Dennis was still silly; Don continued to be fat and Rochester was the same sassy butler he always was.
“Now, I’ve been reading this reviewer’s column for many years, and it’s a darn good column. But every week, every year, this columnist’s style of writing is always the same. Always verbs, pronouns and adjectives. Why doesn’t he get some new things? (Ed. note: If he’s inferring to me, I added prepositions in 1946, first man in the business to change with the times.)
“Radio critics scream, ‘Why don’t the comics stop already with programs about Thanksgiving and Christmas. The air is filled with them.’ What would they have me do on Christmas? Set off skyrockets and roman candles and have Phil wish me a Happy Fourth of July?
“On opening programs, why do the comics all do the same thing— talk about what they did on their vacations? Well, let me ask you something. If you worked with someone closely and then separated for the entire summer, what would be the first thing you’d ask him when you saw him again? How he liked Jane Russell in ‘The Outlaw?’
“Oh well, television is with us now, and I’m waiting for some reviewer to say: ‘It was an enjoyable video show, but darn it, always the same old faces.’”
No comments:
Post a Comment