论文部分内容阅读
Radio is the medium of the voice. Whichever language is used， it’s all about the voice， the voice of man and the voice of music. Nor does matter whether the programme involves news， entertainment， storytelling or straightforward discussion， it’s still about the voice. The rhythms will be different， the pitch will be higher or lower， the urgency may change and the inflexions will vary from country to country， but radio remains the preeminent medium for communicating the musical note and the spoken word.
The reason for this attribute is quite simple： radio is directed to a single human sense - hearing - without the distraction that can be created by vision， smell， taste or touch. How often have you watched television and realised that you can’t recall what was being said， because you were so enthralled by the visual images？ The film media are designed to appeal primarily to the visual senses， while radio is specifically written and articulated for an audience of listeners. The result is that there can be a real beauty in well chosen voices， a beauty as subtle as any painting.
Many of the greatest actors were recognised initially for their vocal delivery， rather than for their acting， particularly in the mid-20th century. These were people who learned their trade on the theatrical stage and on radio， where expression and projection of the voice were key skills. As the movie genre has grown in importance， much of that has been lost， as actors have been encouraged to mumble or whisper for so-called realism. But not on radio， where audibility and harmony matter.
Does that suggest that radio is the perfect communication medium for the human voice？ Not necessarily. Too often， producers forget that inexperienced actors and interviewees can speak in a sort of babble that is understood by their own social group， but can be very hard for others to understand. Yet no-one seems to spend the time to explain to those people that they may need to articulate their speech more clearly for radio. The same can be true of regional accents， which can be extraordinarily difficult for the untrained ear to follow. In English， the Glasgow accent is notoriously difficult for other speakers of the language， though it can be easier to follow if one can see the action and watch the speaker’s lips. So radio does have its limitations， and television its advantages.
Somehow， though， there is a beauty about radio reportage， even when intense activity is involved. Take， for example， a major golf tournament， a tennis match or a football game， when all you have is the sounds coming over the radio. I recall with fondness the football World Cup Final of 1966， not just because England won， but because I was in living in Kenya at that time， and I can still picture all the family gathered around the radio in our home in Nairobi， listening to the voices of the BBC’s reporters. Their performance， and the background singing and the roar of the crowd， were so evocative that one could almost feel the atmosphere in Wembley Stadium. And what one couldn’t see， one could imagine. Therein lies the magic of radio. It may indeed be the medium of the voice and of music， but it is far from being one-dimensional， because it also has the power to stimulate the imagination to create the images one cannot see. The listener has the ability to participate in the same event as millions of other people， yet simultaneously to enter his own world， with his personal vision of the unseen activity. Even silences have the ability to contribute to atmosphere and transport one to the scene： a well-judged pause in the commentary can enable one to imagine walking down the fairway with Tiger Woods， or preparing with Alistair Cook to face the next ball in a cricket match.
Another childhood memory was a Kenyan friend who was a “radio ham”， an amateur radio operator， who had his own short-wave radio broadcasting studio in his home， from which he could call similar enthusiasts in other countries， to chat about politics or farming problems or his new car， or to arrange to meet them in some far-off land at a future date. As I sat with him in his Aladdin’s Cave of wireless valves and other electronic gadgetry， he would talk to a rancher in the Australian Outback， another friend who lived in Rhodesia and his brother in England - and all without having to pay a cent for the call. I wonder how many such people still entertain themselves in such a delightful way， rather than through the medium of the internet.
Has this particular kind of magic become a thing of the past？ Is it rapidly being superseded by the visual media？ My friend Wu Wei thinks not， and she’s right， of course. In addition to being the taxi-driver’s friend， the medium one can enjoy while continuing to watch the road， radio remains the entertainment medium of choice for millions of people around the world， people who， like the cab-driver， are on the move and are engaged in their work. But the principal reason for the survival of radio is Darwinistic： it have evolved with the times and had become stronger and fitter to deal with a competitive future.
Gone are the days when public radio in Britain was limited to a tiny number of channels operated by the BBC， and all other pretenders were refused licences and forced to operate from offshore （literally： Radio Caroline operated from a ship just outside the UK’s territorial waters！） and were treated as “pirate stations”. The power of radio as both an information channel and an entertainment medium has been fully understood， and radio has developed in professionalism accordingly. Long may it continue to do so. In this increasingly globalised world， radio has the potential to be an enormous force good， as the voice of greater understanding between nations. That’s a voice we should cherish. Hear， hear！
The reason for this attribute is quite simple： radio is directed to a single human sense - hearing - without the distraction that can be created by vision， smell， taste or touch. How often have you watched television and realised that you can’t recall what was being said， because you were so enthralled by the visual images？ The film media are designed to appeal primarily to the visual senses， while radio is specifically written and articulated for an audience of listeners. The result is that there can be a real beauty in well chosen voices， a beauty as subtle as any painting.
Many of the greatest actors were recognised initially for their vocal delivery， rather than for their acting， particularly in the mid-20th century. These were people who learned their trade on the theatrical stage and on radio， where expression and projection of the voice were key skills. As the movie genre has grown in importance， much of that has been lost， as actors have been encouraged to mumble or whisper for so-called realism. But not on radio， where audibility and harmony matter.
Does that suggest that radio is the perfect communication medium for the human voice？ Not necessarily. Too often， producers forget that inexperienced actors and interviewees can speak in a sort of babble that is understood by their own social group， but can be very hard for others to understand. Yet no-one seems to spend the time to explain to those people that they may need to articulate their speech more clearly for radio. The same can be true of regional accents， which can be extraordinarily difficult for the untrained ear to follow. In English， the Glasgow accent is notoriously difficult for other speakers of the language， though it can be easier to follow if one can see the action and watch the speaker’s lips. So radio does have its limitations， and television its advantages.
Somehow， though， there is a beauty about radio reportage， even when intense activity is involved. Take， for example， a major golf tournament， a tennis match or a football game， when all you have is the sounds coming over the radio. I recall with fondness the football World Cup Final of 1966， not just because England won， but because I was in living in Kenya at that time， and I can still picture all the family gathered around the radio in our home in Nairobi， listening to the voices of the BBC’s reporters. Their performance， and the background singing and the roar of the crowd， were so evocative that one could almost feel the atmosphere in Wembley Stadium. And what one couldn’t see， one could imagine. Therein lies the magic of radio. It may indeed be the medium of the voice and of music， but it is far from being one-dimensional， because it also has the power to stimulate the imagination to create the images one cannot see. The listener has the ability to participate in the same event as millions of other people， yet simultaneously to enter his own world， with his personal vision of the unseen activity. Even silences have the ability to contribute to atmosphere and transport one to the scene： a well-judged pause in the commentary can enable one to imagine walking down the fairway with Tiger Woods， or preparing with Alistair Cook to face the next ball in a cricket match.
Another childhood memory was a Kenyan friend who was a “radio ham”， an amateur radio operator， who had his own short-wave radio broadcasting studio in his home， from which he could call similar enthusiasts in other countries， to chat about politics or farming problems or his new car， or to arrange to meet them in some far-off land at a future date. As I sat with him in his Aladdin’s Cave of wireless valves and other electronic gadgetry， he would talk to a rancher in the Australian Outback， another friend who lived in Rhodesia and his brother in England - and all without having to pay a cent for the call. I wonder how many such people still entertain themselves in such a delightful way， rather than through the medium of the internet.
Has this particular kind of magic become a thing of the past？ Is it rapidly being superseded by the visual media？ My friend Wu Wei thinks not， and she’s right， of course. In addition to being the taxi-driver’s friend， the medium one can enjoy while continuing to watch the road， radio remains the entertainment medium of choice for millions of people around the world， people who， like the cab-driver， are on the move and are engaged in their work. But the principal reason for the survival of radio is Darwinistic： it have evolved with the times and had become stronger and fitter to deal with a competitive future.
Gone are the days when public radio in Britain was limited to a tiny number of channels operated by the BBC， and all other pretenders were refused licences and forced to operate from offshore （literally： Radio Caroline operated from a ship just outside the UK’s territorial waters！） and were treated as “pirate stations”. The power of radio as both an information channel and an entertainment medium has been fully understood， and radio has developed in professionalism accordingly. Long may it continue to do so. In this increasingly globalised world， radio has the potential to be an enormous force good， as the voice of greater understanding between nations. That’s a voice we should cherish. Hear， hear！