Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-01-30

HzGssG &R 81 %Ezxe<.~AS I22es.oSSzz1
Two comedies new to Washington were
presented this week with distinguished sue
cess. Each served to introduce player
whose capacity for stellar achievement had
despite previous excellent work, been quite
unsupported Lawrance D'Orsay has al
ways been highly agreeable performer
But his full value could not be perceived
until Augustus Thomas took him and
dramatized him. Miss Maxine Elliott was
esteemed to devoutly as a beautiful wo-
man that her pretentfons to serious work
were but scantly considered, even though
she had never failed to provide highly in
teresting and attractive heroine for the
comedies in which she was associated with
her husband, Nat Goodwin. 1t is one of
the ironies of the season that Mr.. Goodwin,
whose fame and popularity as star are of
long standing should score failure with
production of "a Midsummers Nights
| Dream" SO large and expensive that fail
ure se~-ned impossible, while his wife with
only the prestige of a capable leading wo-
man appears in f1imsy society comedy by
an author whose percentage of failures has
| lately grown quito formidable and makes
| one of the most conspicuous hits of the
| winter. 1t is signal triumph of Mr.. Clyde
| Fitch over that arch enemy of the average
modern playwright, the late William
| Shakespeare.
The week brought the two American
dramatists who are more active than any
of the others, into the range of close COM
parison. The contrasts of literary style
are not so strong as first impression
would lead the auditor to think Each has
a varied and unlimited facility for repartee
| xyjtt y,br xxt
has more of a sting than that of Mr..
Thomas. Judged by his plays, one might
say that he views life largely from the
| standpoint of his famous stage character
Beau Brummel." He finds little to adj
mire, save within the gilded circumference
of social exclusiveness. His heroes and
| heroineS are selected from the ranks of
| human superiority, defined by the visit
ing list of the -Four Hundred, with an
occasional dash Of pIutocracy. His tragedies
are mainly built about the catastrophes
that may befaIlsa bank accountant, and
while he may address a certain mild and
| respectful Arafllefy to the foibles of the
fashionable; world, he reserves his fercest
cyncisms for the middle and lower classes.
| The poor worlafng girT' finds scant sym
pathy with Mr. Fitch His ridicule of the
manners and sentiment of the hair dresser
in Her Own Way is so clever, SO true
to humand nature. so unsparingly incisive
and so irresistiby funny that it is sur
prising to find soElittle of this satire in his
general work His fashionable characters
are drawn4wHh sbe same suave discretion
that some basters with wealthy fiocks have
| been accused Of exercising in preparing
their comments ron current iniquity. His
! characters may beSwarranted to offend no
one whose opinion is likely in any way to
effect the fashionable favor of Mr.. Fftch's
plays. Even his defaulters are usually hand
| some, lovable and more. or less interesting
young men. He is quite the antithess of
Dickens, whose humor was characterized
by a close and profound sympathy with the
people who meet the world at disadvan-
tage. Neither does Mr.. Fitch attain to the
distinction of resemblance to TIlackeray,
| who although he disdained the less favored
portion of humanity in selecting his sub
jects. drew his pictures with steady I'M
! swerving touch and shielded no one. 1t is
quite possible that Mr.. Fitch's plays will
find place in permanent literature as ex-
amples of the influence on authorship of
the conditions obtaining in the strange
ey-magnetized days of the new bios
soming twentieth century.
x x
Mr.. Thomas, on the contrary, deals with
normal, whole-souled types. who dominate
! their surroundings, instead of merely
ftecting their social environment. They are
good, robust hearty individuals, sometimes
capable of dropping into poetry. but doing
so with an unaffected grace that leaves
! them on a familiar hand-sha king basis. Mr.
! Thomas possesses the touch of nature that
| makes the whole world kin and does not
| construct characters merely to be scru-
spite all their extravagances of comedy or
warmth of emotion, flesh and blood, people
who recognize Adam as the common ances-
tor of us all.
The two plays possess a point in common
| in that they antagenize tradition in the
| methods of treating certain familiar char
acters. The stage villain and the English
| lord in search of American wife have
long been objects of popular disdain. 1t Is
difficult to say which has proved the more
| Questionable to the sentiments of the pop
ulace The villain is regarded with hatred
and the English nobleman in the hands of
| most comedians has quite undeservedly be-
| come an object of plying scorn. These two
unpopular personages have been selected
| as heroes and the result is a conclusive
| demonstration that they have been victims
! of gross injustice. There is no longer any
| doubt about it. There are many eXtenuat-
| ing circumstances in the career of the
stage villain f1the author would bet let
| YOU into the secret, and the English lord,
if you orlys get properly acquainted with
him. may prove to be downright good fell
low. even if he is not, as Mr.. D'Orsay con-
| fesses in the play, ''superficially alert"
| CHILDREN IN TIER OWN wAY."-The