Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1924-02-03

transportation ana HOtcl DIS. ~
sign on the sidewalk in front of his
theater read. Matinee, , pm.
Sharp" The brusque cd gentleman
saw it and exclaimed. who's Sharp:
Make that = pm. Stetson.' Have
you found a manager to produce
your dramatization of Les Miser-
ables?'" asked one actor. Produce
itr rejoined the other in scorn; Il
haven't even found one who could
pronounce it'll! Quips like these
, were banded every day and every
hour of the twenty-four. In each
instance, those present laughed
heartily, vowed it was right merry
jest; and said, Let's have another"
Naturally, managers did not like it
and sought to devise business sys-
tenn which would compel actors to
be good-at least off stage. Actors
base their Equity discussions on con-
tracts, working hours and wages !;
but l am not sure that tempera-
mental inhibition is not the real
basis of the trouble.
The creation of regulations is an
important part of the process of
theatrical promotion. Type and pic
lures easily do the work, but the
result does not insure drawing pow
er when there is a handicap of bad
material. The same system is ap-
piled to authors and a curious con-
fusion arises in this connection. An
objection is made by the distin-
guished Hungarian litterateur, Mr..
Szebenyei, OF New York, to the
scant recognition given in a review
of THE Moonf1ower" to Lajos BRO.
the Hungarian who originally wrote
it. AS Mr.. Szebenyei has not taken
the trouble to copyright his well
considered contention, | will make
bold to reprint some OF his words,
since they reflect most important
viewpoint:
characterization ought to be con-
nned to immigrants, and 'adapters,'
ought to be barred in literature. 1t is
Il pure and simple adulteration, and is
contrary to all the laws and usages of
literary ;y,,s ethics. 1 have seen several
never yet seen one improved by them"
x x !: K
The carelessness of foreign au-
thors in protecting their work from
vandalism is matter to be account
ed for only by the fact that poets
will be. poets. Then, too, they may
not be in position to bargain close
ly at the risk of FORGETTING access
to the markets of the American
world. But no reauthorship which
kept audiences up till midnight, as
did that of "The Moonfower,"
should be condoned, even on bust
ness grounds. The word author
has come to have two theatrical sig
nihcances; one defining creative re-
sponsibility and the other indicating
proprietorship of the American
rights. .... NIT
Proprietorship of the rights is the
consideration that lends itself to
practical enforcement. Yet proprie-
torships are subject to curious vicis-
STUDIES. The Kansas City Star of
January E has a half-page article
about a book which has circulated
millions of copies, "In His Steps"
by the Rev. Charles M. Sheldon.
Through inadvertance, the publisher
deposited only one. copy in the
Library of Congress instead of the
two required. The result of this
oversight was to place the work in
what the law designates as the pub
lie domain, and the author has never
been paid anything for its wide
spread and frequent publications.
His idea of using it on the profess
sional theater stage as play, he re-
CARDS as defeated by the production
of drama of religious purport too
closely resembling his book in
theme. In discussing the situation
DR.. Sheldon appears disposed to ac-
cept the matter in spirit of resig-
nation such as becomes his own
teachings. While an His Steps" is
barred from a career as a drama,
owing to the belief that its theme
has been exploited by professional
enterprise, negotiations are under
way for its presentation as motion
picture. Any film producer who
gives DR.. Sheldon's work an ade-
, quate representation with SYM
pathetic recognition of the authors
interests and purposes should be
hailed as sure-enough Boy Scout
whose good deed has made a day
eventful.
| white Collars" by Edith Ellis,
was produced for the first time in Los
Angeles by Louis o. MacLoon. It lie
Il - faA hi xrvhH A1,