63 BBC Internal Circulating Memorandum — Subject: Letter from J. C. Drysdale, 19 April 1938, Drysdale File, BBC. This document was circulated around several members o f staff for comment.
o f Music’s platitudinous response to Janey’s grievances in no way reflects his and his staffs annoyance at her persistent complaints or their judgement o f Drysdale’s music.64 In the internal memorandum issued in response to the complaint, the Depute Director o f Music, Kenneth Wright, states his frank opinion on the matter thus:
I have looked right through this file, as though I was aware that Miss Drysdale has for years had a complaint against the Corporation for the “neglect” of her brother’s music, I also knew that the fault lay not with ourselves, but with his music.65
It seems that Janey had initially sought the assistance o f Ian Whyte (the BBC’s head o f music in Scotland) to promote broadcasts o f her brother’s work at the London Station, but the tactic failed as Wright notes:
I am anxious that Ian Whyte should be exonerated in this matter, as he has repeatedly asked me if he could possibly include any o f Drysdale’s music in our recordings for the L.T.S. [London Transmitting Station] and our library. When I pressed him, he admitted that there was only one which he felt might be suitable, namely Tam o ’ Shanter, and I purposely listened to it in a programme and could not feel that it was any use at all for propaganda purposes. In feet, I was very disappointed in it. It is as old fashioned as MacCunn, and nothing like so good.66
Wright defended the lack o f broadcasts on the Scottish network by emphasising that the regional stations’ programme production was destined for the National and Overseas Services and that only material o f sufficient quality was suitable for such broadcasting. On this point he declares: “no-one can claim that his [Drysdale’s] music can deserve a place in such programmes.”67 However, he did concede that there might be scope for an occasional broadcast when the second wavelength became operational in Scotland. What Wright means by propaganda is unclear: did he perceive nationalistic overtones in
Tam o ’ Shanter, an undesirable feature during a period when the BBC’s duty was to
stress the solidarity o f the Union, or did he simply believe that the work was o f insufficient quality to represent British music on the Overseas network? The answer probably lies to some degree with both arguments.
All new works submitted for broadcast by the BBC were examined by an anonymous panel that recommended those which were appropriate for broadcasting. For many
64 Victor Hely-Hutchinson to Miss Drysdale, 15 May 1945, Drysdale File, BBC
65 K.A. Wright, [BBC Internal Memorandum] — Subject: Complaint from Miss J. Drysdale, 15 May 1945, Drysdale File, BBC
66 Ibid.
67 Ibid. For further information regarding broadcasting during World War Two see Asa Briggs The War o f
Words vol III o f The History o f Broadcasting in the United Kingdom (London: Oxford University Press,
years, this panel’s reports were confidential and unavailable to researchers; however, they have recently become accessible revealing not only the identity of the assessors but also some seemingly inappropriate judgements of composers well respected today. Lewis Foreman notes:
From the mid-1930s onwards, the BBC instituted a system in which what we would now regard as some of the leading composers of the day were de facto secretly divided into two classes — the assessors and the assessed. Thus, John Ireland, Benjamin Dale, Arthur Benjamin, Edmund Rubbra and Gordon Jacob ... read and generally rejected the music of Frank Bridge, John Foulds, Alan Bush, Havergal Brian and George Lloyd.69
Amongst the examples cited by Foreman are views of Gerald Finzi’s Bagatelles for clarinet and piano which were judged in March 1942 as being of:
No musical value, but well written. The clarinet part is not very interesting, but with a good player could sound expressive. ... I do not think it a worthy contribution to the clarinet and piano literature.70
A spectacular example of how the judges failed to recognise a work, admittedly rather slight in stature, which is highly regarded by musicians today; however, such assessments do have to be read in context of the times in which they were written. The fact that many members of the panel were also composers has a bearing on their judgement of others — the possibility of nepotism cannot be ignored. A number of
71 prominent figures examined Drysdale’s work with almost unanimous disapproval. In May 1943, John Ireland declared Herondean “uninspired and dated. Little more than the musical platitudes current at the time it was written”72 whilst Gordon Jacob believed the work:
Would seem faded and out of date and it does not appear to have sufficient strength and character to compensate for the [decided] lack o f sophistication shown both in its themes and their orchestral treatment.73
Comments such as these are almost of more interest for the light they shed on the views of the judges, as the opinions they express on the music judged. However, the assessments of A.B. (most likely the Australian conductor and assistant BBC Music
68 Lewis Foreman “'Good', 'Bad', 'Not Suitable for Broadcasting'” The British Music Society Newsletter 85 (March 2000): 4
69 Ibid. 70 Ibid., 5