New-York tribune., 1909-11-28

sion as ever il had. The relationship With
tie past endures: the relationship with the
present l. what contemporary dramatists
choose TO make IL. what they are capable
OF making IT, There are numerous drama
Tiers. there are many writers OF plays;
there are few dramatists- But never. Ht
one time. have dramatists been numerous.
Most plays are as quickly forgotten as
most literature"
What one is getting Al is this: II a story
is 10 be dramatized II should not be spoiled
But most stories are spoiled by the drama
Tiers. The spelling concerns not only in
cideut and dialogue il concerns character
IS well. II a character is spoiled by the
rlaymaker the STORY is spoiled along with
II. the purpose is defeated. DraulatizeTs
fail 10 recognize this fact. SO do producers
as a rule.
Take case: The recent "dramatization
Of The White Sister" Marion Crawford
has been blamed for this; that Is to say ac-
cised Of spelling his own story and defeat
ing his own purpose What he actually dlo,
In all probability was 10 leave the matter
chiefly 10 those who were supposed 10 know
more about the stage than he knew The
result was play made from the book, but
The White Sister" was not "dramatized'
A character was ruined-the hero's. And
with thar ridiculous change vanished all the
purpose and significance Of the story. Why
"d-amatize" Crawford for the purpose or
,noiling him? A popular star tours the
country with success in the curious vehicle
thus provided. But the starring success does
rot alter the case. The success would have
been longer II the play had been stronger
The dramatizer weakened his handiWork be-
cause he did not understand where the
strength OF the play lay
Take q dismal succession Of failures this
season al a certain theatre in Broadway.
Some Of these things were 'dramatizatons'
The Debtors" for instance This was
supposed 70 be based on tale by Dickens
II was really based on theatrical tradition
about providing situations for players
The result was neither FISH. flesh, fowl. nor
good red herring. The playmakers forS0s
Dickens, human nature, probability and all
the rest of IL, and thought only Of the pre-
cious situations" and fiat" parts, that IS
20 say. thought only Of one function OF the
theatre. which means IN such cases ;heatri-
cality. a look at life over the footlights and
through grease paint Idols was as bad
Il couldn't have been worse. Yet there the
dramatizer had a dramatic story ready 10
hand But he failed 10 grasp the meaning
OF " VIC only 4fdHlA AL4I ELplg a-eN 40 -
istence. and down fell the pretentious struct-
ure cracking about the playmaker's ears.
There are instances in plenty Of the dis
tortion and weakening Of strong themes
by the makers Of plays "Septimus" IS the
latest. Even admirable acting does not af-
feet the argument. The part OF Septimus
IS admirably acted 10y George Arliss, who
IS fully entitled 10 high praise. Emmy,
too, is portrayed with fine skill and the
Uiusome personality OF Miss Emily Ste
vons a charming young actress who has
been on the stage only six or seven years
and is now winning her first real recOSni-
tl5n. Mr.. Cyril NOuug's WigglesWick IS IS
clever a bit Of character acting as New
York has seen in a long time. But the
other persons are shadows; two Of them.
Fora and Sypher. fantastic shadows. IL
the playmaker had read not the novel, but
some reviews Of IL, and random clippings
from Il. HIS play would not be further than
row from the book and its purpose. Sepu-
ulus's sacrifice is not even hinted al. Tho
significance Of his relation 20 the lives
around him is almost entirely lost. Locke
wrote not only sn amusing story. one OF
the most humorous stories of "A century, but
q story with a deep meaning which this
play does not grasp. Loeke's Fora was the
f MAINS ftI4lE OF 0fIt4ilt4S ACTON. MS
spring was too powerful FOR the dramatizer
20 deal with. Sypher becomes merely an
.. snd Fora It's equal. These two could
be omitted from this play and the play
would not suffer. But II Fora Mddleuisc
and Clem Sypher were omitted from Lockes
book. there would be no Septimus. Then
why drag IN Locke? or why call the play
''Septimus''? ''rhe Marriage Of Septimus"
might do or "Emmy's Elopement" There
are numerous opportunities for title
which would not claim more than tire play
i fulu.s Why not found a play on "The
Merchant II Venice" and let Portia change
places with Nerissa, Bassauio with Craft
ano. and begin The play with tie trial
scenee
Mr.. Locke consented TO. the stage ar
rangemcnt Of "Septimus." one is told. And
Bernstein consented 10 spoil the American
version Of "IsraoI" by providing a stupid
happy ending for Broadway: performed
the operation himself. IN fact. Here "a novel
Is not concerned. what is concerned is the
effect of conseutiug 10 versions" OF per-
versions. I'm this case a dramatist became
a dramatizer II cannot be denied that he
had a right 10 Co a. he pleased with his
own play. But dramatizers may claim d
right 20 DO as they please with their dram
atlzatOus. The point is not in either Of
these rights" Rights and wrongs are noc
under discussion. even though one might
feel unfairly dealt with IT,, after seeing
"aenry Esinond" advertised at an uptown
theatre. d. found tiat Beatrix had be,a
omitted from tho version" or had merely
'Waiisa On" The point. the question. con
Gems the pow'rs and capacities Of play
Wr'Gqis. Even when authors aid and abet
TIE theatrical amputation Of their own
works. their public is Iikely TO resent tie
operation. Very often tie box Office SUI
fo,s without knowing why. But. whether
the box Office suffers or rejoices. the fact
remains that a dramaiist's play in hand Il
worth two "dramatizations" in the bush.
4. w.