New-York tribune., 1920-02-13
BY Haywood Broun

u is only fair to say that we are
not qua alitied to pass absolutely un-
biased Judgment on Rachel Crothers's
he and She which was produced a t
the Little Theater last night. The plav
cspouses side Of the feminist question
WIN which we are in the most com
piete disagreement. We have alwavs
found that the soup tastes lust the
same whether it is opened with loving
care or by the hired help. Nor are
we convinced that young daughters
leho TO become entangied in unfortu-
nate love affairs the instant mother
peglns TO paint picture or deliver q
series OF lectures or write short stories
for the magazines. Indeed. we feel
so strongly on this subject that as soon
Is we have a couple of weeks to spare
we are going to write D pro- feminist
pay IN which the young girl Of the
mouse marrIes q street cleaner because
her mother is so busy bHking apple pies
that she has no time to take proper
care of her daughter.
Miss Crothers's play leads her to
seems to Us the most outrageous ex-
tremes IN setting forth the doctrine that
Woman's place is in the home. The two
cnlet characters IN the play are two ar
tists who have been married long enough
10 10 nave sixteen -year-old daughter.
The husband is competing for a prize of
100000 which has been offered for the
best frieze for public building. A few
days before the competition closes the
wife confesses to her husband that she
IS disappointed in his work. It has lost
something. IN its development from the
original idea. OF course it's big, but it
hasn quite got, or rather, it might be
a little bit more, or perhaps lust trihe
less. But, at any rate, she does not
think that it is good enough to win the
prize. She then tells him that she has
been secretly working on frieze of her
own and she offers TO let him take her
idea and work it out He looks at it and
says that 1t IS wonderful piece of work
for woman, And he adds that of
course it's too slight TO be of much use
for the competition.
Accordingly, the wife replies very
naturally that she will work it out on
her own and send it in. And she does.
In the next act two letters come. One
tells the husband that he has been
awarded second prize and the other in
forms the wife that she has won.
Whereupon, after everybody in the
household has abused the poor woman
as II she had been convicted Of shop
lifting, the husband suddenly declares
that in spite of his previous opinions
ne has now come around to the view
that women have no right to meddle
in mans work. Motherhood, he saws,
IS the greatest blessing in the world
and he orders his wife to refuse the
prize which has been offered to her.
Moreover, 1t is explicitly stated that he
is not jealous the least little bit. but
that he is only thinking Of his wife's
r,,I 80 = II
he makes himself still more obnoxious
by telling his wife that of course he
couldn't think of touching Il penny CT
her 100000, or letting her contribute
any OF 1t to the maintenance Of the
household. There is every indication
that the audience is expected to ap-
plaud this fine display of manly inde-
pendence, but we must admit that it
seemed to lis the most outrageous dis
play of caddishness which had ever
been presented to an audience for ap-
plause.
In the next act the discovery is made
that the siXteen-year- old daughter of
the artist has fallen in love with q
chauffeur, all because her mother has
been too busy to give her twenty four
hours day Of maternal affection. The
woman then decides to let her hus-
band do the freze while she takes her
daughter on trip to Europe to cure
her of her infatuation. 1t is our belief
that any woman who was actually
touched with genius, as Miss Crothers
assures US Is the case with her heroine,
would let her daughter marry the
whole police department before She
would let anybody come between her
and her work. All geniuses assure US
that they are just like that.
But for the fact that We cannot
abide Miss Crothers's point of view
we might pay more attention to the
fact that IN many respects she has done
nspicuously fine job. Her people
talk very naturally even when they
talk rot. No playwright in this coun-
try can write scene in which the talk
comes back and forth between some
four or five people with as much skill
as Miss Crothers. Moreover, it is only
fair to say that in the last act the
sculptor behaves somewhat more de-
Gently than III the second. At anv rate
even IN disagreeing with the point
which the playwright seeks to make
we think she has written an interesting
play.
Miss Crothcrs herself played the
part Of the artists wife. Under the
st.cin of being author and leading
lady too she was visibly nervous. In
her quieter scenes she was excellent
but when she was called upon to play
the tenser moments she played too
hard and hammered her lines with a
rather disturbing vehemence Cyril
kelghtley gave an excellent perform
ance, but the rest of the cast was not