The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1903-04-26

son for the present or the future
This particular aspect OF the PROPOSE
tion nowhere stands out more clearly
than in matters relating to the theateT.
However often the comparison of the
stage of our day with that of bygone
times has been made. it cannot be held
that the matter has been exhausted.
However much has been said about the
differences between now and hen. the
subject is surely too fruitful not to yield
material for further reflection and dis
cussion. This thought must furnish the
excuse-f there be need for such-for
what follows,
1t may be pardonable TO Clothe the
premises from which deductions and
conclusions are TO be drawn in this in
stance in the form of a question, even
though the liberty is taken to append
the answer which to us seems proper. In
what essentials then, does the stage Of
our generation most signally differ from
that OF the past? The answer is-in the
lack Of originality of conception and
treatment. With but few eXceptions-ex-
tremely few. indeed-the dramatic writ
ers of the present day may be said to
choose, each for himself. one especial
line Of work and proceed along that until
he has exhausted all its possibilities and
of necessity is compelled to traverse
the same ground over and over again.
Wearisome Iteration.
Each of them may achieve a certain
kind of excellence in his particular
field, but to the discriminating public his
efforts and his productions must in the
end become monotonous even to the
point of WEAKNESS. Nor is the force of
this circumstance Iessened by the fact
that q given production efea given play
wright-or. for that matter, several OF
them-may enjoy phenomenal success. It
is none the less true that the stage, the
theater, the drama-caT it what you
wilI-are not permanently benefited or
ennobIed by the work of his pen
Far be il from the purpose OF. the
writer 10 deny the constructive merit Of
some OF the plays with which the Amer
lean public has been RECALLED within the
past two or three decades There are
not few which prove the authors to be
possessed of great fnesse both IN the
choice Of situations and of good taste
in the matter of language. It would be
pitiful. indeed. If some good grain were
not to be found among the ehaff.
There are men and women playwTights
who are master mechanics at their
trade and @hos 20 Build UP an feaihcs SO
ingeniously that its presentation can
not fail ia please the senses Of the pub
lie, especially that great public that fire.
quents the theater simply pour
s'amuser." II has been asserted more
than once that our theatergoing gener-
alton does not care to be instructed: it
simply wishes to be pleasantly enter
tanned II this be the correct estimate.
why. let it go al that, and-''vive Ia
bagateIIe!
originality at Discount.
4 IN the brIefest possible way it is but
necessary to point out the class Of
PLAYS which Of late years have been put
on the stage TO make good the assertion
that their authors lack that originality
Of conception and treatment which dis
tinguished the works Of such men as
Sheridsn-whosc delightful comedy
school for Scandal" we shall soon have
an opportunity 10 enjey: Goldsmith
Moiiere. Scribe, Bulwer, and dozens Of
others Of that era who might De named
These men did not shun the mental eff
fort Of searching for an idea nor the Ia
Dor TO work it out TO its legitimate con
eIusion. Instead Of productions like
theirs we are surfeited with dramatiza-
lions. adaptations. and other conglomer-
atioHs OF novels-good, Lad. and indif-
IeTent-most OF them desIa lied in the
process Of Decentralization of what
literary merit attached TO them in their
original form The absolute truth Of
this assertion must be attested by every
enc who has. If but casually and super
dciaIIv. observed the dramatic offerings
OF the present day. Ninety per cent OF
modern playwrights-and this is liberal
allowance-are more than satisfied with
themselves If they. can succeed in crib /
hing plot. situations. climaxes-aye. /
even the very ianguage-of some popular /
novel and lick these into some sort Of
shape for presentation on the stage. They
lack originality OF conception and their
productions ipso facto. lack originality
OF treatment MacauIay says somewhere
that the character OF the drama con
forms 10 the character OF its patrons. or (
words TO tAat effect bat it would be too
harsh judgment on the tbeater-Iovine /
and theater-p atronizing public of our
day to apply so severe a criticism. If
the cold meats OF the novelist thug
hashed up by the dramatizer and
"adapter -adopteT would perhaps be
The more correct designafion-are &C
copied without remonstrance by the pub /
lie. il is because that public Is either /
Indifferent TO lis theatrical menu or too +
good cured TO enter a protest
Hope for Better Things.
Fortunately. every cloud has its silver /
lining, and the cheering CLEAN can be /
diseerned, we think, in the case under /
consideration. There has been uttered
a protest from more than one quarter
against adapted drama. Hash is all
right once in while. but served up as q f
regular diet it is apt to become nauseat-
Ing, Food OF greater consistency is de
siraole and generally is forthcoming
when a determined demand is made for