The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1907-12-29
SIDESTEPPNG TNFIDRLITY
RE1UsAL TO DISCUSS ETHECS or
JOHN GLAYDE.

WIN hvu OF AeNvos ~ a0W L4ko NJ
wild automobiles could not drag FROM
TK1 SUNS dramatic reviewer to-day q
discussion OF the sthics involved In John
&ayde's Honour" Every other week u
Quite often enough to settle the vSred prob
lena OF domestic infidsEty. In fact. like
Arthur Hugh CloUGh. we are tempted to
prtbe a new DeOalogus. The one he made
hnay stand very we'll for six commandments.
But We shall have to change the seventh a.
follOws;
no nOS sdaStery commit;
A drama always follows II.
There would be more incentive to discuss
the ethics Of John 0Iayde's Honour" II Mr..
Sutros play were more important a. a
specimen o. drama. Doubtless there In no
such thing a. a trite theme TO a genius.
But Mr.. Sutro isn't a genius. He IL a sym
pathetic. Glove and imaginative translator
Of Maeterlinok: he is a man capable Of
brilliant and telling dialogue with a certain
cynical. epigrammatiC bite 90 IL; he showed
himself in The Walls Of Jericho the pos
SCISSOR Of considerable dramatic force. But
his best has not been great. and his worst
has beon commonplace. John Glayde's
Honour" is certainly o his best.
For instance, what has become of the
e~pigrammatic b~rilliance in that play7 One
young man. a kind OF youthful Cdylev Drum
rIC. speaks engaging nonsense. nonsense
with n well bred. scholastic learning about
IL. You know him for a university mani
Some of the other characters make epigrams
now and then, oT you guess they are trying
70 IN spite of the actors. CThe ordinary
American actor delivers an epigram as
II he we're ashamed of il and Of the author;
he's been to the Lambs Club. and he knows
people don't really talk that wayD But for
the most part the dialogue never strikes
sparks In John Glayde's Honour never
puts the touch Of comedy distinction on the
lighter scenes nor the charm Of style or
character on those more serious. IL is
laborsd. fiat. commonplace. From a man
OF Mr.. Sutro's promise IL is distinctly dis
appointing.
And as for John GIGvde himself and his
precious hOnor-well, II may be quite true
that a man can rule a kingdom but not his
own queen, yet somehow We are incor-
rightly romantic enough to desire that
when a Captain, nay, a MajOr-General Of
Industry, heraIded by trumpet blasts Of
praise for his might and power, arrives
on the scene. he shall do something more
for three acts than hold Cablegrams in his
trembling fingers, sob over the desertiOn
w AH hVRh0' w n AAN@A AAAhOAt AAu
plead with his wife to come back to him.
IL may have pleased the British public to
see Mr.. Sutro's conception Of an American
financial magnate in action. They never
saw ThOma W. Lawson of Boston in
Young's Hotel during a smash on the
Street, And it may please the American
public to see this same conception. Heaven
knows, the American public accepted that
feeble straw dummy in The Lion and the
Mouse" But somehow We cannot escape
the conviction that a man who can rise to |
tho heights Of commercial and financial
power John GIdyde is represented az hav-
ing attained has depths within him Mr.. |
Sutro has not sounded. resources Of sction, |
springs Of feeling, above all, Instincts Of
reaction, that would have resulted Ger
tainly in a far livelier and probably in a
far different play. That isn't to say he
would nave made his wife come back to
him. The bitterest Socialist could not
wish him such a fate as that. But the man
postulated far exceeded in dignity and I
force and intelligence the man actually
shown on the stage. The cause for n
UnreRlity of the play need not be sought
further. That alone is sufficient to account
for IL. And that shall be our excuse for
refusing to discuss the ethics of the drama. |
The COW L. In the hammock;
What difference does Il maker
There 10 a curious instance in the play, |
however. of a fine effect spoiled for many
people by the habitually careless stage
management in our theatres. which de-
serves notice. In the second act the guilty
lovers are surprised by the sight OF an arm
reaching in from the adjoining room and !
closing the door. The audience should
be surprised even before the lovers: the |
situation should be almost uncanny in /
its suggestion. But so often have we seen
doors left open by our players when they
should have been shut and the arm OF a
scene shifter reach in to close them that
many people at first regard this episode
In John Glayde's Honour" as but another
slip in management. Actors must be
rather stupid people. When an ordinary
mortal observes that a door has not closed
he steps back and shuts it. II actors could |
be taught this slight initiative. which would
not seem to require an overwhelming de-
gree OF intellect nor a wide departure from |
the three steps into the room. right foot
forward. face down stage. taught them
by rote. effects like Mr.. Sutro's would not
have to suffer.
And now to speak Of real things. of
two plays as far apart in manner and mat
ter as the poles, and yet each potent
to affect the sensitive behoIder under
certain moods, as life itself can at times
affect him. with a solemnity and a sadness
not often allowed the rein by most Of us,
still less often. perhaps. made into speech.
II may be there is no need to make speech
about IL now. yet in the arid deserts Of the
drama as it il played IN Broadway. In the
turmoil Of the Tenderloin. a green oasis
OF reality is a. springs OF water in a thirsty |
place. as the shadow Of a great rock in a
weary land. Out of the silept. buried wells
Of feeling the words will flow. IL 10 a bit
ter kind OF comment that one should feel
the necessity to apologize!
The two plays are peter Pan" and that
grim picture Of Russian revolution down
on Irving place. con the Eve Strange
contrast! Yet the plays are alike in this
-