New-York tribune., 1921-03-02

We read the other day in The Globe
IN interesting article by a physician
ramed Smith Ely JelliHe concerning
Macbeth" and the dramatic critics.
Like most persons outside the news
paper business, DR.. Jelliffe wrote under
the impression that after each per-
formance ballot is taken by the crit
les, and that if the majority votes for
unfavorable notices each critic in town
sets himself to speak i'll OF the piece in
Question regardless of his opinions. If
such conventions are held we have
lever been invited. AS matter of
fact, ii is our impression that this
theory of the organized tyranny of the
press over dramatic entertainment IL
a fixed delusion amounting in its in
tensity to what some of the doctors
call complex. The cause of clear
thinking might be served if some means
were taken to dispel these delusious.
Nr. Jellitfe, for instance, probably
would find interest and instruction if
lie could go. some time Or other, to a
psyche analyst.
A more pertinent criticism OF critics
is contained in little book of essays
called If I May, by A. A. Milne,
author Of Mr.. PIN Passes By. In an
article called "The State of the Theater"
Mr.. Milne says Of critics and the pub
lie:
"They mislead them simply because
they have two standards Of criticism
which the public does not understand
They go to the Bareback Theater for
the first night of Kiss Me, Katie
and they write something like this:
Immense enthusiasm. A feast
of color to delight the eye Mr.. Alfred
de Laurbutt has surpassed himself
Delightfully."- catchy music. E.
The audience laughed continuously
Mr.. Ponk, the new comedian
from America, was a triumphant sue
cess. Ravishing Miss Rosie
Romeo was more ravishing than ever
Immense enthusiasm
con the next night they go to see
Mr.. A. W. Galsbarrie's new play, Three
Men, They write like this: Our first
feeling is one of disappointment. :.
Certainly not Galsbarrie at his best.
The weak point of the play is
that the character of Sir John is not
properly developed. A per
ceptible dragging in the third act.
1t is a little difficult to under
stand why We should hardly
have expected Galsbarrie to have
. The dialogue is perhaps a trihe
lacking in q. Mr.. Macready Jones
did his best with the part of Sir John,
but as we have said Mr.. Keen-
Smith was extremely unsuited to the
part CT George. . The reception
on the whole was favorable.'
"You see the difference? OF course,
there is bound to be difference, End
Mr.. A. W. Galsbarrie would be very
much disappointed if there we're not.
He understands the critics feeling.
which is simply that Kiss Me, Katie
is not worth criticizing, and that Three
Men most emphatically is. But it is
not surprising that the plain man:in-
the-street, who has saved up to take
his girl to one of the two new plays
of the week, and is waiting for the re-
views to appear before booking his
seats, should come to the conclusion
that Three Mem seems to be pretty
rotten play, and that, tired as they
are Of musical comedy, Kiss Me, Katie
is something rather extra special,
which they ought not to miss"
This is a just score against news
paper criticism, but there is much to
be said in defense. The difficulties Of
rising to heights of denunciation against
poor musical comedy are enormous.
Generally thern isn,t apvthior +o n,r,L