Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1922-06-09
THE MOVIE FANS. LETTERBOX
BY HENRY NJ. NEELY

very disappointing. Dorothy Kelly was a
great favoritc of mine always. and
when she married nor. professional
and did that unheard Of thing. retired
to domestic happiness. We missed her.
Her leading man Of those days, James
Morrison. recently distinguished him
self by his work as Gavin, the L;tl"
Minister in the Vitagraph version.
Helen Gardner never liked. though
some of her pictures were the height
of technical perfection. Leah Baird. as
YOU probably know. Is still In the films.
Edison did some very good things. and
they had other stars than Mary Fuller
and Gladys Hulette who were good. For
example, Miriam Nesbitt. Viola Dana.
Charles Ogle. Pat O'Malley, Herbert
Pryor and Mabel Trunelle. I'm afraid
you win the cigar on the subject OF
Marion Leonard: I remember her. \but
III have To admit I cant place what
company she was with.
You may be "hep" to the old times.
but you're not very sure Of your pres
ent ,day facts. Rose COghlan isn't dead.
Didn't you see about all the people
who offered her home when they
heard Of her straitcned circumstances?
And l wouldn't be surprised to see her
on the stage or screen again pretty
soon, the same old Rose COghlan.)
"Just One Of Your Fans writes:
Zone Of the most unreasonable features
of the moving picture industry at the
present time is the habit Of the fans to
assume that the role played by the idol
of the moment Is identical with the
stars personal characteristics. 4 mo-
mcnt's thought would convince the most
fanntical admirers Of. we'll, let us say.
Mae Murray. that she Is no more the
sophisticated but miraculously innocent
young creature Of Peacock Alley than
Walter Long or II. Il. Warner is in
reality the INSCRIPTIONS villain he
portrays. a better example would be
Tully Marshall. fancy every one likes
him. SO let US ask the fans who insist
, that the character Of the player and the
character of the role are one. which Is
the real Tully Marshall: The con.
temptiblc old Odd Jobs Man Of Hail
the Woman; the mischievous Profess
sor Popova in The Slim PRINCESS ;
the canny old postmaster with his spy.
glass in The Source, or the suave au-
tomobile magnate in one of Wally's rae
ing pictures! In all probability Mr..
Marshall in no way resembles any Of
these characterizatiOns.
| In very good magazine article, n
few weeks ago, Katherine Gerould
places the blame for the belief of the
fans that the popular stars personally
are like the superior beings they play
and the difficulties which arise when
the actors real characters become
known upon the shoulders of the
directors and press agents, who have
built up for each player a charming
personality and n devotion to the
straight and narrow that very likely
would have irked even the Apostles.
1T has never been my understanding
that the influence of any of the arts
upon the development Of civilization
has been hastened or. retarded by the
good or bad morals OF the artists. II
this IL so, why should the yardstick Of
personals morals be fourishcd to make
or break an actor, and the whole art of
moving pictures be made an exception :
1T Is not my purpose to cOndOne
hagrant or deliberate violations of the
law, but personally do not see why my
judgment Of the quality of an actor 5
ability, or my enjoyment Of q splendid
bit Of acting, should be swayed by my
knowledge Of the actors personal short :
cOmings. There's too much bad in the
best of u.s. etc. The thing to criticize
on the screen or stage IL the character
created by the author and its interpre
tation by the actor, rather than tn,
personal defects of the medium used tc
present 1t to the public.
when the fappers rush madly t,
the support OF their favOrite hero,