New-York tribune., 1918-12-22
That Orphan Subtitle
Should Be Treated Kindly

Kenneth Mcgowan has been dodg-
| ing us ever since he wrote something
which sounded like the curfew of the
subtitle. But to-day we caught him
half way between the water cooler and
the mail boX-no, we don't know which
way he was gong-and said reproach-
fully: "You said that you did not like
sub-titles."
81 said that did not like some sub
titles" fenced X. NJ, suavely.
"You said that subtitle was a
child without a parent. You SAID
that Mother dialogue nor description
had any place in the silent drama. You
said that the perfect movie told itself
in pictures with no need of written
words. You said" -
write it," said Mr. Macgowan, as he
rushed in the direction of the water
cooler.
Very we'll, Mr.. Macgowan, would
you like to go to the theatre and see a
play without any dialogue? "Sumurun"
was all very we'll, but was it as good
entertainment as "rea for Three or
| "Sleeping Partners?
| Some titles do jump out and hit you
They never could seem part Of the
story. These are the so-called decora-
tive titles, done by misguided persons
in their best Spencerian style. They
have large curlicue capitals and some
times wreaths of daisies or doves hold
! ing olive branches in their beaks. Titles
should be so unobtrusive, that one does
1 not realize that he is reading printed
words.
The trouble is that not enough at
tention is paid to the titles in a pict-
ure What heroine ever could live this
down, for instance? "Brother, will you
speak to my fiance and try to ascertain
the cause of his coldness? Things have
,, not been going smoothly of late be-
tween he and l." And yet we read that
very title, supposedly spoken by one
of the stars, and the picture was made
by we'll known film corporation.
Clever titles will make a picture.
This was strikingly illustrated in the
case of "The Sixteenth Wife," mclo-
drama which the Vitagraph rettled
into farce, a screamingly funny one
and big success, at that.
And why do so many title writer's
yearn for the past tense? All of their
remarks take the reminiscent form
they embrace retrospection and refuse
to relinquish it.
"Mary Brown was d beautiful young
school teacher" "The cabin stood on
the edge of the desert" "Robert loved
his mothers maid, who was a pure and
lovely girl"
Of course there are cases where we
admit that titles are superfluous. 1t
isn't necessary to say anything about
it. All too frequently Mary isn't beau
tiful or young, but if she is people
like to discover such little things for
themselves. Let the pictures also
speak for themselves.
But if title writers insist on usurp-
ing their rights, why not do it in the
present tense? We certainly need titles,
but we certainly need title writer's, too,
or perhaps final censors with, first of
all, a sense of humor, then knowl-
edge Of human nature knowledge
Of grammar, punctuation, the use of
quotation marks, and who have taken
complete course in letter writing.
Also, how often does a royal fiancee
sign herself "Princess Sonia to a ten
der missive or Lydia Van Peyster write
to "Friend Paul" inviting him to din
ner and signing herself "Mrs. Van
Peyster"l otis true, It's pity, and
| pity it's tits true"