Luxembourg; [1986-10-12]

This is the Christian Science Monitor Weekend edition, show number 86102, air date October 12, 1986. Hello from Boston, USA. This is the Christian Science Monitor Weekend edition, and I'm your host, John Parrot. Coming up in a moment to look at the world's view of this weekend's summit and a conversation with Speaker of the House of Commons, Bernard Weatherall. Stay with us. With the summit very much in mind, we now join a roundtable discussion

with the monitors editors. In the chair is John Yammer, and with him are National News Editor Brad Nicobocker and International News Editor Paul van Slambrook to take a look at how the world views the Icelandic meeting. Brad and Paul, both leaders have been meeting each other with rather tricky problems at home right now. In Mr. Reagan's case, there's Eugene Hassenfus, the American who is captured when his transport plane crashed in Nicaragua. And then there's the continuing controversy over disinformation within the Reagan administration and the resignation last week of State Department spokesman Bernard Kalb in protest. Brad, are these minor irritants or do they indicate something deeper stirring within the Reagan administration? Well, it's hard to know for sure right now, John. Kalb's resignation seems to confirm that the administration unofficially, if not officially, was trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the US press. And as Kalb said, anything that hurts America's credibility hurts America. That's the bottom line ethically, but politically and diplomatically, I'm not so sure. I mean, the reaction in Europe has been pretty ho hum. I think the headline, one headline read, so what's new? And I think

for many people that about sums it up. Paul, what do you think is in it for the Europeans if there's a thought and relations between the United States and the Soviet Union? Well, they'll be relief at the lowering of tensions, but there's some anxiety going into this of what kind of a medium -range missile deal might come out of it, which seems to be the most promising area. These countries don't forget invested a lot of political capital in deploying US missiles a few years ago. And there's the principle of deployment that I think they want to see carried through, and they're also concerned about some missiles that aren't being talked about here. And those are shorter -range missiles. And those are stationed in East Germany and Czechoslovakia and also could target Western Europe. What about behind the iron curtain in terms of economic benefits and other benefits that might accrue from warmer relations between Moscow and Washington? Well, I think generally there's, again, there's relief to see a thought in an overall strategic relationship, but there could be a mixed reaction actually in Eastern Europe. The reform

-minded countries like Poland and Hungary, I think, would favor any impulse of reform in the superpower relationship, whereas the more conservative states like Romania and Czechoslovakia may not welcome this at all because it could build pressure at home under their own regimes. And I guess in an area like Asia, you would probably see a general applauding of warmer relations from countries like Japan and the newly industrialized countries of Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, etc. China, too, is warming up with the Soviet Union right now. It appears although Weinberger is counseling the Chinese not to expect too much in those relations. Brad, if a deal is worked out either at this summit or at some point in the future, what's the likelihood that the Reagan administration can carry it out? Is there opposition to closer relations with the Soviet Union from the right wing, perhaps? Well, yes, it's been interesting in some way ironic,

even humorous to notice that the people who have been counseling caution regarding the Soviet Union have been people who have counted themselves as friends of Reagan over the years, conservatives, right wingers. And on the other hand, the people who have been applauding Reagan for going to Iceland have been, for the most part, in many cases, liberals who have been snapping away at M &R's control. But those are pretty much intramural battles. When it comes down to a major deal, if there is a major deal, he'll probably be able to carry it through. Yeah, I don't think there's any doubt about that. He's in a very strong position politically, and he knows it. He's not going to make a deal that he doesn't think is good for the country, and I think you'll have the public behind him. Brad, does Reagan's trip to Iceland at all signal that the sort of the battle in the White House about whether or not to even deal with the Soviets has been won or lost in one direction or the other? Oh, I think that's pretty clear, Paul. I mean, we see reports, for instance, that Richard Pearl, who was one of the real

hardliners in the Pentagon, is probably going to be leaving his job at the end of the year. Or he claims that he's gotten what he wants. But in any case, he's leaving. Another indicator is the fact that Weinberger was overruled, for instance, on the recent U .S. acceptance of the position of Soviet position at Stockholm. Secretary of State George Schulz, Paul Nitzie, are very much in charge in arms control these days. Paul, what about in the Soviet Union? There have been some questions in the past year about whether Gorbachev really has control of the Soviet Union and this kind of thing. Does it look like if he carries home a deal at some point that he'll be able to deliver that deal? Yes, I think it will, depending on the deal. I think he knows what sort of a deal he can live with, but he can deliver a deal. For him, it's got to be something that saves him some money so that he can get the economy going. That's really number one priority from Mr. Gorbachev. That's the key consideration. I guess that's what brings the two superpowers to the bargaining table, at least from the Soviet point of view, the need to

see some sort of a decrease in hostilities in order to get the economy rolling. Well, gentlemen, thank you very much for joining us. Well, you've heard the editor's words, but how does one go about beginning to decipher political communicators coming from the heads of states themselves? Our man, Vince Winkel, plays a word association game with Tufts University, Diplomacy Expert, Martin Sherwin, to help us capture some of the meanings behind the words. Professor Sherwin, this weekend, we'll hear a lot of comments from Spokespeople in Iceland at the pre -Summit. And they'll come out and use a slew of words to describe what's going on there. Now, let's play a word association game if a spokesperson

comes out and says, this morning's talks were frank and serious. Do we interpret that as meaning that they got absolutely nothing accomplished? Not that they got absolutely nothing accomplished, but that they didn't make major progress to the definite goal. It's more like the image of a father has walked out after a discussion with a teenager who's been misbehaving and he told his wife we had a frank and serious discussion. We don't know exactly what the teenager is going to do after that, but we think we've made some kind of step forward perhaps. Today's conversations were candid and productive. Candid and productive has something of the rather more positive nature. The image of that might be the end of a labor negotiation, of course, which could always fall apart and nobody is sure what's going to happen. You often hear

that when Spokespeople come out of a labor negotiation. The one I like best is useful because useful for just me something like a can opener. We're going to go off on a hike and we're going to have something useful things with us. That means that they really haven't done anything very useful at all. Is useful in the same lines as an important exchange? Yes, that would be good. There's also talks have been difficult. That's sort of a red flag that we're not going anywhere. This is the beginning of the labor negotiation where it's likely that they're not going to get anywhere until a mediator is called in. A breakthrough is the big one. The breakthrough is the big one because the breakthrough sets up expectations that both sides are going to have to live up to. It's very unusual that breakthrough would be used at this point. The administration has signaled that that is the last thing

that is likely to happen. I think it's the last thing that the administration really wants. Professor Sherwin, do you have any other favorite words that you can think of that are used to describe the talk? Helpful is a very good word. Helpful means that we're still here and we're breathing and we're making progress. And it's something like useful, not quite a can opener, but it's like having a person along who knows something about the terrain we're going to cross. Hard bargaining lies ahead. Does that mean things are difficult? That's frank and serious. Martin Sherwin with Vince Winkel. Now we'll join the

monitor's senior television correspondent David Willis as he talks with Speaker of the House of Commons, Bernard Weatherall. We'll get a closer look at the man, how he sees his position as Speaker of the House and his perceptions of freedom. Here's David Willis. In Britain it's parliament that is ultimately supreme. Once a year the Queen, a constitutional figurehead, comes to it to formally open its new session with a speech written for her by the government. The ceremony is held in the House of Lords, but it's the Speaker of the Commons standing in front of the Prime Minister who symbolises Parliament's power and independence. Within the framework of firm monetary and fiscal policies designed to secure a continuing reduction in inflation, my government will speak up in that power. Speaker Weatherall told me how he sees his position. The Speaker is the representative of the people in putting their grievances to the monarch. You'll see around the walls the portraits of many of my

predecessors, eight of them had their heads chopped off two on the same day. And the reasons why they were beheaded was of course the monarch didn't like what they had told him or her about the common grievances. So I claim, as the Speaker, the beginning of every parliament, I claim our undoubted rights from the monarch. That is the right of freedom of speech, the right of freedom from arrest, a result of what we have said. On the House floor, the Speaker presides over 650 of the Cypherists and sometimes unruly members, all must seek his permission before they can join the debate. The Speaker's role is to conduct the National Orchestra. It is to ensure that an accurate tune is played on the floor in the chamber of the House of Commons. So that the electorate at an election can decide whether

they wish to hear that tune played again for a further parliament, for the five years, whether they wish to have the tune changed, whether they may wish to have a bit and a bit of a Kurdish government. That's their decision. But behind the imposing figure of Mr. Speaker, behind the pomp of parliament, there's an individual, a man of considerable warmth and humility. He started life as a tailor's apprentice sitting cross -legged on a workshop floor and then he moved into his father's business which still trades under the family name. I still carry a symbol in my pocket. I've read about your famous symbol. Now, why does the Speaker of the House of Commons carry a symbol in his pocket? This Speaker. My mother was 79 when I was first elected and within the first week she came here to have tea. And after we had tea together, she said to me, I'd like her to do something for me. I'd like you

to carry your symbol. And I said, why on earth do you want me to carry my symbol? And she said, well, it might help to keep you humble. And that is my humility. And how has it worked? I hope so. You have said in the past that you see the role of Speaker as the guardian of the freedoms of the House. That means a lot to you. Indeed. We must never forget that the freedoms which we enjoy today are inherited from our forefathers. And we, in our generation, are the custodians of the freedom. And this is our secret duty to hand them on intact to future generations. A few years ago, ten years ago, the most stable country in the Middle East was the Lebanon. And we should draw a lesson from that. Our time be, who is a British historian. Once wrote these words, he said that

of the world's known civilizations, virtually all had died, not from enemy action, but from decay, from within. And the progression has always been the same. And is this? From bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to weight courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to apathy, from apathy to dependency, and from dependency once again into bondage. Let's reflect upon that. And perhaps also bear in mind those famous words which are often quoted within Britain and in America. All that is needed for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Speaker of the House of Commons, Bernard Weatherill. And this is the weekend edition of the Christian Science Monitor on Luxembourg 208.

I'm John Parrot. This program is brought to you by the Christian Science Monitor, an international daily newspaper. Its weekly world edition is printed in England and is read in over 170 countries. Coming up, listen to non -mainstream music which can be described as unexpected. Stay tuned. But first we'll turn to Peter Pradavan. In his essay, Effortless Beauty, he tells us a bit about the secret of life and how to appreciate it. It's read by Olivia Baram. The light plays on the crest of the snow -capped waves. The trees in front of my little beach cottage, pregnant with coconuts, move gently in the warm breeze. Women walk on the sand with that rhythmic unhurried step of my African sisters. Children's running feet make spirited sounds on the garden path. Fishermen haul

in their nets, slow, powerful movements, chanting as they pull. Effortless being. That is the secret of life. The supreme achievement, to be simply oneself, one's best self, without effort. Real virtue, like beauty, is Effortless. In fact, like holiness, virtue is simply beauty -translated into acts. Maurice, my peasant friend in the Swiss mountains, is like that. He, with his teeth a skew, his three -day beard, his generous belly and unkempt hair, is utterly beautiful. When we first met, I was in my native Switzerland looking for an old haloft I could transform into a shallow, a native of the Valder herons where I was staying and offered me one. It looked in fairly good condition, although the price seemed a bit stiff. I was poking around it when Maurice

appeared from nowhere. His old felt hat in a wild position on his head. Pieces of straw all over his woolen jacket, and those clear, clear blue eyes like a mountain lake. You want to buy that, he inquired? Skeptically it seemed. I felt a little defensive, but he was so disarming, so utterly transparent and trusting and childlike. I mumble some sort of a reply. Well, if I may volunteer, that's not a good buy, he added. Of course you might think it's none of my business, and he paused for a while. But one day we may be neighbours round here. I want to be able to look you straight in the eyes, and if I knew you had made a bad buy, and I had done nothing to prevent it, I couldn't. Such an effortless sense of principle. Very beautiful. It is amazing how theologians have managed to turn virtue,

i .e. lived beauty, into something utterly distasteful and so totally unappealing, when in fact it is the most natural way of being. Love is infinitely more natural than hate or resentment. It needs an incredible effort to hate someone over a long period of time. It tears at you inside, gives you insomnia, mental obsessions, jealousy, anger, resentment, hypocrisy, they're all in the same bag, monstrous sick efforts to be what we are not. Now think again of love. How light do you feel when you love? How generous, how spontaneously good, how open to the whole world? How ready for adventure? And some people still dare pretend that man is naturally aggressive and competitive, that love is a rare delicacy for weaklings. Take my friend Denver. If you met Denver you would understand what

I mean. Being with Denver is like being next to a warm stove in winter. Yet he is not a practising member of any formal religion, and I have never heard him discourse on love. He loves because he has understood that to love is to live, and to withhold love is to perish. He owns very little by our Western standards, yet a wealth of goodness fills his home. Love is the supreme form of effortless being. One can never be until one learns to love. Music Barred in an industrial part of London lies a musical treasure. It's a piano museum full of restored antique player pianos and organs,

where you can sit down and play at your heart's content. Bill Sajant walks us through. Keyboards flutter, guests reminisce. Music fills the vaulted chamber. Is it an elegant Viennese dance, an Edwardian sweray, an American jazz club? No, it's London's musical museum, far off London's well -beaten tourist path. It is housed in a drafty 100 -year -old church, dwarfed beneath a mammoth industrial gas tank. Twenty people at a time are invited to sit in chairs in the center of the church, surrounded by player pianos, pianolas, or kestrians and pipe organs. It's a priceless collection of instruments, once owned by dance halls, theaters, and royalty. Now, this was a famous bandit once belonged to Pences Pitt. Do you know who she was? Well, you're still at school, aren't you? You know, Queen Victoria's youngest daughter. It came from Ken, you can pal, just fill the stowed and move in. In the

center of this enchanted world is Frank Holland. Anybody remember the old song called Smiles? Yes, right. Sing along with it, will you? So, here we go. The birds are here. Frank Holland is host, curator, racon tour, and doting father to the hundreds of instruments. A former engineer, he started the museum in 1963. Twice daily, he brings groups of visitors through the exhibits, often allowing them to touch and play the valuable instruments. I love you. Stop. It goes on for hours, that role. Everybody wants me to play it all the better, but there's no time. I've got a lot to do. If Singalong is not your cup of tea, perhaps you would like to hear a virtuoso performance of Rimski Korsakov's Song of India.

Three pianists were employed to make the original piano roll for this piece. It's slightly eerie to watch the invisible fingers of three long -gone pianists dance across the keyboard. Each key is depressed with exactly the same force and expression that they used generations ago. This is the first time I've ever played a piano. I've never played a piano before. I've never played a piano before. I've never played a piano before. I've never played a piano before. I've never played a piano before. Please hands up, be honest with yourself. Is there anyone here who did not like that music?

We move on to a large pipe organ, once used aboard the Naval Training Vessel HMS Ganges. A sailor lived in the back of this organ and sold off bits of the instrument to obtain food. At the end of the afternoon, visitors reluctantly leave this enchanting world of music. At the Musical Museum in London, I'm Bill Sargent. Every year at about

this time back here in the United States, the Brooklyn Academy of Music in New York City opens its three stages to a series of concerts, plays and other performances that steer deliberately away from the artistic mainstream. It's known as the next wave festival, and observers have called it a showcase for the new, the original, and the downright unexpected. Monitor critic David Stirrett reports on this year's edition. What you're hearing is music by the Cronos quartet, a most unusual group that specializes in most unusual pieces, including string quartet versions of jazz classics, and even rock songs like Jimmy Hendrix's Purple Hayes. It's a skilled ensemble and an unconventional one, and that makes it a perfect participant for the next wave festival. An unconventional event held each year at New York's Brooklyn Academy of Music, called the BAM, or just the BAM for short. The latest next wave

runs through the end of December, and features a wide variety of offbeat music, theater, dance, and performances that don't quite fit any of the usual categories. Later in the season, some of the most popular attractions will go on tour, bringing their unorthodox wares to audiences far from the festival's Brooklyn headquarters. The next wave has earned its status as one of the cultural world's most influential events by blending excellence with experimentation, plus a knack for finding artists who are not household names, but whose work places them on the cutting edge of today's performing scene. To be selected for the next wave program is to be recognized as a world -class artist in your chosen field. What makes the next wave different is that your chosen field doesn't have to be a traditional one. You could be a composer like Glenn Branca, who writes symphonies for armies of electric guitars. You could have a new wave juggling act like the flying caramazole of brothers, or you could be one of the new breed of performance artists, who create artworks for the stage instead of painting on canvas or

sculpting in marble. The next wave has showcased any number of them, including such rising stars as George Coates from San Francisco and Tim Miller from New York. And don't think next wave talent comes only from the United States. It's a truly international festival that prides itself on presenting such truly international stars as West German choreographer Pina Bausch and Japanese dancers Iko and Koma. The value of the next wave festival lies not only in its annual lineup of events, but in its liberating idea of what art and performance can be. Recent years have seen a great shaking up of old conceptions that said artists have to place their work in pigeonholes with nice, clear labels. Many of today's performers enjoy working in several disciplines at once, like Meredith Monk, who's a director and choreographer, as well as a singer, dancer, and filmmaker. And exciting collaborations are taking place between artists in different fields, who've learned to feed off one

another's creative energy. The next wave has encouraged and supported many of these adventurous talents, giving their imagination free reign. The results have ranged from a six -hour performance piece by Laurie Anderson to Lee Brewer's version of an ancient Greek tragedy with a gospel music score. This year's program is no less varied, starting with a major dance work by Merce Cunningham and John Cage, called Roratorio, and ending with an operatic play by director Robert Wilson and composer Philip Glass, a pair of next -wave veterans. In between are a play by the Impossible Theater, a concert by the Brooklyn Philharmonic, a dance program by the David Gordon Pickup Company, three separate recitals by the Cronos quartet, and an evening with composer John Hassel, whose rhythmic and exotic sounds you're hearing now. Plus, lots more. It's no wonder that adventurous eyes are focused on the Brooklyn Academy of Music this season, where artistic daring

do is a way of life. In New York, I'm David Starratt. And you're listening to the weekend edition of the Christian Science Monitor, brought to you on Luxembourg 208. I'm John Parrott, and coming up the phenomenon of Doctor Who, a U .S. look at the what behind the who. Stay tuned. It's the longest

running science fiction series in world television history, but did you know that Doctor Who is seen in 60 countries and has an estimated audience of over 100 million people? Doctor Who is now seen on over 180 television stations here in the United States, thanks to public television, and American Hoovians are proving to be every bit as loyal to the show as Trekkies are to Star Trek. Now that a traveling Doctor Who exhibition is over here, we sent our man Greg Palmer to see what more he could find out about the what behind the who, and what American Hoovians have to say. As the new fall shows on American television start dropping from the schedule like so many autumn leaves, there's a quirky little import on PBS that just keeps coming back. When the British Broadcasting Corporation premiered Doctor Who in November 1963, it intended this science fiction show to last six weeks. This fall, Doctor Who started its 23rd season on the BBC. Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who

is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who Doctor Who is Doctor

Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who

is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who is Doctor Who There's a little more meat to it in effect

Brian Sloeman leads us through the Doctor Who exhibit The first character you come across is the most famous villain of them all, the Dalek And here's the person who right now is trying to exterminate us Who or what is a Dalek Well the Dalek is really the monster that put the show on the map It's almost impossible to describe the Dalek with his sub -sucker On the end of one probe and this very obvious plywood construction with little bubbles that cover his base But the fun part was the only Dalek, the only actors sat on a tricycle inside that base And that's how they rode around the various sets that we created But I shouldn't be giving away BBC secrets But he is the probably the most heinous villain of them all It's in a lot of ways like our Star Trek in the sense

that not every encounter that the doctor has and not every encounter that the enterprise has are violent encounters There were adventures and there's exploration If the 60 ,000 member Doctor Who fan club of America is any indication the time Lord of Gallifrey and his companions will be around for a long time to come I'm Greg Palmer Canadian singer Songwriter Bruce Coban has been well known in his homeland for years But it wasn't until 1984 with the release of Stealing Fire, an album based on a trip to Central America The Coban has become known here as an outspoken critic of US policies in Central America

And he's continued to use his music to try to focus attention on that region Sarah Terry spoke with Coban recently Here comes the helicopter Second time today Everybody scatters And hopes it goes away Bruce Coban was as surprised as anyone when he scored a worldwide hit with if I had a rocket launcher The irony of his success is that he doesn't like playing the song in concert It brings back painful memories of the place that inspired the song A Guatemalan refugee camp which Coban visited in southern Mexico The song is an intense expression of outrage over the fact that the refugees were still being fired on by the Guatemalan military Because that frustration is

expressed in lines like if I had a rocket launcher I would retaliate Coban says he even had doubts about whether he should record the song I had serious misgivings because I was afraid it would be taken the wrong way And I didn't want to be going around inciting people to violence But then I thought well that's exactly the kind of self -censorship that gets you nowhere in the end as an artist You have to be responsible but you also have to say what you've seen and if you write something that you think is good It should be out there in front of people Coban's first trip to Central America to Mexico and Nicaragua was sponsored by Oxfam He came away politically charged and artistically inspired And with enough material to fill an album full of evocative images of a people and their land and their struggles I don't think

anybody's an objective truth teller, you know, I've never met a journalist who could claim to be that objective either There is a difference of course and what I'm saying to people I'm going to put in a different way I'm not delivering hard -cold facts, I'm delivering what I felt and saw I'm not going to sit down and write revolutionary anthems or anything like that for the sake of doing that Because that's not what I do, you know, I'm more like a reporter than that That I think the first responsibility is to some kind of truth, you know, with a capital T, wherever that is Obviously some people are going to hear these songs and say well that is propaganda Because they're not going to believe my version of what I've seen in Nicaragua or Guatemala or whatever And I want to be able to say to them, no it's true, you know, I didn't make any of that up, it's all there And I didn't, I mean there's almost nothing on the last two albums that's invented The album continues

many of the themes, Coburn began exploring with stealing fire And like the earlier album, it's guided by Coburn's strong sense of ethics As an artist, there's a certain responsibility that goes with the fact that you're attempting to reach a certain number of people And you're attempting to, in a certain sense manipulate them That's what art does, you know, it tricks people You paint a picture of a scene and you convey a certain feeling with that I don't see it as a sinister thing, but it can become sinister and that's where the responsibility comes in Because you have the capacity to convince people of things to a certain extent And I think you have to make sure that you know what it is you're saying to people A lot of artists I know don't seem to have realized that, you know, they don't understand what the effect of their work is Coburn's work and his vision of the world are also guided by his religious faith As a Christian I feel like the first and foremost obligations are to love God and love my neighbor Obviously loving your neighbor is the part of it that affects the rest of the world and how you view the world

I'm told by my faith, by the Bible and so on, that my neighbor is everybody So when I see people in Nicaragua or people in Ethiopia or people anywhere else who are in trouble, my impulses that something should be done to help them Coburn says that his travels have given him insights into what part of the problem is I'm inclined to look for why they're in trouble because there's no way to solve anybody's problems without knowing what the cause of the problems is And I keep running up against the fact that we are the cause of the problem We as citizens of the developed world, not the only cause by any means But certainly one of the major factors and we're in a position by altering our approach to dealing with those countries To affect their lives for the better or at least to stop influencing them in a negative way I take an active position with regard to that because I think some changes have to be made I also just from a pragmatic point of view think that if we don't make them we're going to end up being Everybody's bad guy and when they get to

be many billions of people looking at us that way I don't think that my daughter is going to grow up in a very healthy atmosphere And that's not the world I want to hand my kid Coburn says he's committed to seeing the Central America issue all the way through to the end He says he's not looking for other trouble spots in the world to write about But at the same time I'm curious about everywhere else I'd love to go to Africa I mean my original love for travel revolves around the different ways people think And the fact that every different language carries its own thought patterns with it And I like that sense of growth that I get from being exposed to those different ways of looking at things I'm Sarah Terry We're all wonderful

And our time's up We enjoy receiving your comments and suggestions Just write to me at Radio Luxembourg, London, West 1 That's Radio Luxembourg, London, West 1 Or give our London studio a ring at 493 -5961 That's London, 493 -5961 And this has been the weekend edition of the Christian Science Monitor I'm your host John Parrott, our producer is Rusty Eggkin and our engineer Paul Hofstetter If you're listening on Medium Wave, stay tuned for next week's Top 40 with Tim Smith right after the news There's a rainbow shining in, being a speller, falling diamonds in red or in red

Laying bucks done, moving lots of, I stand here dazzling with my hiding brains We're all wonderful