The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1925-03-12


X \
Prince An to'in BibescO,
sportsman, prince, and play
wright, is reported to be the
good angel backing Brock
Pemberton's more or less new
venture, Puppets" This play
( was produced here two seasons
back under the title Of "The
/. Marionette Man" and the whilom
Garrick Theater donated its lares
and penates for the dayboo.
People whose patron saint is
Addison Sims will recall that
life-sized puppets were manipu-
lated in view of the audience.
They have been retained in the
new version with such emphasis
that all the good press notices
went to the puppets and prac-
tically none to the actors.
~
March II, 1926.
Dear HGfOLd:
"Peter Pan" and MGriIy1s Nil
Ter, as I touched both in a reviesO,
Of the Dillingham; production,
pvhile you read ''The NeO
Yorker" with a. nurse IN ca
thedrGL sChite stroki1sg your
brO1U, seemed to haze turned a
feaO of my best friends against
me. In short, they say, 1 aOent
"aOrOng," that neither the setting
accorded the Barrie play By
Charles ID. nor the efforts Of
Miss Miller acre deserving of
the tGmdGtory phrases BESTOWED,
and that 1VGs led into a maze
of. complimentary prose through
a personal admiration for Mari
Inn or a dinner-dGte of some
gears previous or "a desire to
meet her or something quite as
ridiculous. ~,-
Some of nry colleagues we're
against me, yet none seemed TO
probe the production, at least
not IN print.
In mn discussions of Miss Mil
Ter and the play, I lOGs quite IN
able to make comparisons since,
as stated MneqMtUOcGIty aud
Nth no ata1scing Of aOords, hGd
1aeUer seen MGude Adams IN the
role. D,hen Charles FrohntGn pre-
scented the fantasy In the United
States for the first time about
tsVenty years ago.
But the boys eroMcIitg o., the
other side of the fence, nor, IN
fact, any one with 10hons / talked,
recalled one stigma on the Mdude
Adams Vent,re, which, 1Ohen
vieOed IN the light of the present
revival, stands out as blot on
Charles FrohmG1 and makes the
Miller production almost his
tOric.
Moude Adams did not phGv
. "Peter Pan as Barrie 1UrOte 1t.
During reheGrsGLs the play UGs
torn to skreds, for FrohmGp IN
sisted that the Adams role be
built to "stGr" proportions.
Striking phrases and even single
4vords a0ere piIfered from, other
characters and given to Miss
|, Adams, solely ut the behest of
FrohmGn, 1OhO VGs determined
that the one Characterization
should be outstanding. By the
time "Peter Pan" actually took
to the New York stage with
Adams playing the lead, the "boy
whO wouldn't 0roW up'' had, in
reality, "groVn decidedly" under
the tuteLGge of the eminent Eng
lish JeW pOho sponsored the pro-
duction.
Miss MiLLer's appearance aCGs
billed as a "reVfUdI." Nothing
of the sort! 1t is the first Gu-
thentic presentation of the Bar
RTE teSt In America With q first
class scenic and costume accom-
pGniment. Search the records,
interview DID, timers, call up Dill
bingham, by Long-distance tele-
phone, or eUen ask Daniel F1oh-
man, brother of Charles, and
this one astounding fact 1OiU be
told you.
Many VhO suaU Miss Adams
. play the part still contend she
eclipsed Miss Miller. Being
matter of personal opinion, sup
pose she did. Her art mag haze
been more cO11sun,mGte; her ia
cility of Interpretation more sig
Mificant; her strength of physi-
cal grandeur more impressive
still. the fact remains SHE WAS
NOT BARRIE'S "PETER PAM"
but that of CHARLES FROH--
HAN! -
Dillingham; adhered strictly to
the Sir James manuscript, and
when revieaOing the play I felt
that Miss Miller got the Barrie
shirt into her 1Oort. No1O, of
course. if Frohmam had Eved and
could haze assisted Basil Dean
IN directing and staging "Peter
Pan" zoe might haze gotten
something quite different. But,
I really feel it couldn't haze out
stripped the whimsical creation
of Barrie, who put into this mas