The morning journal-courier., 1908-02-22
THE DRAMATIC CRITIC.
What He Is Thoug It 10 Be. and What
 He ShOnll Be.

What He Is Thoug It 10 Be. and What
 He Shomll Be.
 William Winter, the veteran dra matic critic of the New York Tri1dre has been to see Vio.l Allen in irene Wycherley," play now appesring at the Astpr theater, Kew York, and, as usual, when the theme oi the pro duction turns on the sex problem, MT. Winter condemns the play un sparingly He has kind words for Miss Allen, whom he calls "a capital actress" but he has no words of praise for the play in which she is ap- bearing. Incidental to the review. which is of unusual length, MT. Win ter takes pains to go on record regard ing what he considers the province of dramatic critic. Here is what he has to say:
 There is an erroneous notion that dramatic criticism is provided for the benefit of theatrical managers, actors and play writers. Criticism is written for the information and, if possible, for the guidance of readers. The newspaper press is under no obliga- tion to furnish instruction as to act ing, play writing or stage manage ment. The acted drama becomes inn portant to the public, and therefore to the press only at the point where it affects the public mind The interests of theatrical managers and the vanity l of actors do not provide a reason for dramatic criticism, nor can criticism do more than recognize achievement and encourage merit Art originates and expands. not from outward instil- lation, but from inward impulse. The moral aspect. the intellectual quality the spiritual drift, the artistic and in dustrial conduct and prosperity of the stage, as they tend to color and influence the public mind, supply the 1 justification of dramatic criticism Its legitimate object is the advancement of civilization, the development, in right, and it ought forever to oppose i all that is base and degrading, all l that is detrimental to right feeling, good taste, and rectitude. If the 1 writer of criticism who follows that course can reinforce his critical re- views with wide knowledge of drama, I of literature, and of human life, with sympathetic, expert knowledge of dra- matic construction, theatrical history, i and the technical expedents of dra- matic art, so much the better for readers, actors and himself. But criticism which is written merely as analysis of dramatic construction is often superfluous. The public does not require it, and, moreover on merely technical questions of acting there are many good reviewers of plays who could advantageously be in structed by any good utility" per
 former. If the production of such
 plays as Irene wycherley' involved nothing but questions of dramatic
 construction and representation il
 would be right and pleasant to pass
 over the subject with only 8 word oi
 record But that play is represent.
 ative of contemporary perversion o'
 the theater; a perversion tending tc
 the dehasement of taste and thus tt
 the degradation of morals; perver
 sion indicative. because of it's fire
 quency, of some deep-seated propen sity to wrong thinking and wrong conduct. Writers who are aware O intellectual obligation to the time il which they live cannot rightly let suci plays pass without examination anC ! protest. The town has had lbera
 allowance of moral lessons as t
 sexual iniquity and it's dire results which everybody knows, and abou
 which nobody needs any information and the public has reason to be yer,
 weary of this subject weary of beinl told about either adulterers or black guards, weary Of those pragmati
 moral-mongers. who are eontinuousl
 blathering, with the old Irish ballad ist:
 "I have scanned the motives and way of men And the skeleton grins through then