Los Angeles daily herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1884-1890, 1888-06-03

and honofably tho merits and demorite
81 any performance; operate, dramatic,
musical, prenic or otherwise. that may
take place within the moral juris-
dietion OF TIC journal he represents:
He Is practically free lance,
and while his writings echo but
one mau's opinion it is supposed to be
endorsed by bis paper and TO be the
sentiments Of his readers. Still, l have
seen performances spplauded and en-
joyed by an audience who go to their
homes thoroughly delighted, and ! have
seen that same performance Slated by
some vain, bilious critic whose palm has
not been creased. or who has been re-
fused the courtesy OF two complimentary
tickets, after having already received q
dozen or more. Men Of this stamp are
critics only in name. Their reports are
not infrequently pompous and high
flown, with tendency to impress the
readers with their great Importance, and
are often nisspelled and ungrammatical
l have seen some of this ilk attempt to
pick flaws in PATHS voice, or in Booths
or Salvini's acting. Still such things
are tolerated by an accomplishing public.
The requisites of critic should be .
liberal education, a fluent pen, known
edge Of his subject, u thoroughly unques-
tionable honesty, and familiarity with
journalism. Many men possess . por-
ton Of these, but few can claim them all.
There Is too much of tendency to vent
petty personal spite, or to laud to the
skies some girl whose only merit is her
beauty. Criticisms, to be fair and just,
must be SO tothe people who vest the right
NJ THAR f,I,n r. ~
vocalist is not a Jenny Lind, every actor
not darrick, nor every play Hawlet,
therefore the critic should be guided by
the claims that are put forth. A good
motto for the critic is: Companions are
odious,v and be should studiously refrain
from making them, or be. will often
find that he has made himself ridiculous
in the eyes OF any intelligent person. A
man who has written play or book
which has failed, or has adopted any
professional calling and has not sue
ceeded, is totally unfit for q critics work.
His mind is soured and he vents his dis
appointment on every unfortunate that
crosses his path. Sometimes, however,
the critics errors are due to his superiors,
who restrict him, or to the policy Of his
paper; for there are plenty Of journals
whose local columns are wholly subser-
Went to- the advertising department.
The more money you spend the better
your criticism. That is thrift, but it is
not honor. By all means, preserve the
purity Of the press and do not indulge in
system of petty blackmail
But 1t must not be supposed that
there are not plenty Of able, honorable
critics, and many will leave behind
them records and writings that will
prove invaluable to the next professional
generation. Henry Labouchere, OF the
London Truth, is q most brilliant critic.
George Perry, Of the Boston Herald,
Nym Crinkle, "a. g. Wbeeler) of the
New York World, Joe Howard, OF the
New York Times, Willie Winter, OF the
New York Tribune, are men who have
been widely quoted and whose opinions
are studiously sought after. Some Of
our other able American critics, are
Elwyn a. Barron, Of the Chi
cago Inter Ocean, Colonel Nat Bur
bank, Of the New Orleans Picayune,
Montgomery Phister Of the Cincinnati
COMMERCIAL Gazette, George Goodale Of
the Detroit Free Press, John J. Jennings
late Of the St. Louis Post Dispatch, but
nov on the New York World, John Nc
Council OF the Chicago Times, Harrison
Grey Fiske OF the New York Mirror, and
George Barnes OF the San Francisco Call.
Some Of these gentlemen have earned
their reputation by their ability, but
nearly all OF them have made honesty
and fair dealing their basis, and this is
the only true foundation for reliable crit
icism. Tbs man who let's his hesitate
vanity or malicious spite control his pen,
will assuredly sink into obscurity.
Women have sometimes made criti-
cism a field Of labor, and several have
made enyiable regulations with their
pens, among whom may be mentioned
the "Giddy Gusher" Of the
New York papers, Betsy b." Of the
San Francisco Aryonaut. The critic of
the Kansas City Journal is Mrs.
Reese. Taken as whole, the critics are
9 jolly good crowd, and il those who
have allowed themselves to be swayed
by unworthy passions would but correct
their errors, it would be one more stride
at advancement, and one more step to-
ward the purity Of the press. sincerely
trust that this millennium is close ct
hand. E. J. A.