Evening star., 1932-03-12

Editorial writer's Of the country pro-
! test against the suggestion of Repre-
sentative William l. Sirovich of New
York that dramatic critics of the news
papers arbitrarily contribute to the
! failure of plays which might other
wise have received the approval of the
public. His proposal for professional
| license is believed to lack merit or legal
authority, but the call of the critics to
Washington resulted In no protest.
Proposals of the sort made by the
/ New York Representative are claSSed
by the Walla Walla Bulletin as "a con-
slant threat to an unmuzzled press, "
ard by the Springfield (Mass.) Repub-
lican as challenging the guarantees of
| free speech and free press" While 1t
! agrees that there is much incompetent
| and smart Alec criticism, no doubt, "
! the Republican points out that the
observation applies to many other fields
than that of the theater," and main
tains that 'Mr. Sirovich has not found
] the cure for it." The ASbury Park
Press contends that lit is impossible to
| improve the theater business by con-
cealing from the public how bad the
plays are"
With satirical reference to DR.. Siro-
vich's picture of the critics as assault
! ing instead of defending the drama,
bea ting it down with savage ridicule,
and holding an unholy high carnival
every time a victim is carted off to the
storehouse." the Baltimore Evening Sun
replies: They have brought things to
such a pass in New York, for example,
! that there are only about 40 legitimate
theaters open, and new show can take
| in only about $4,000 a week, while a
comedy after IS weeks, has to scrape
I1yitn nina
ances. Indeed. the drama critics have
! made it practically impossible for any
other than reputable, tirst-rate plays to
make money"
There is hardly any exception" says
the Columbus Ohio State Journal, Ito
the rule that stage productions live or
die because of their own merits, or lack
of them Habitual theatergoers are
never unduly influenced by critics. And
II from certain performances which are
unspeakably bad the critic can get the
| Inspiration to be more entertaining
even If destructive, than the perform
ance could ever hope to be, then that
| is break for that part Of the thea
tergoing public which reads the criti-
ciSmS"
If the opposition to the critics had
its way" according to the Fort Wayne
News-Sentinel, there would be a tragic
weakening Of the sentinel forces which
warn the public against the spoiled
partridge under the spiced brown sauce
in which many current offerings are
bathed" The Manchester Leader de-
clares: DIR. Sirovich must realize that
If a vehicle has true merit, or If it
possesses those qualities which endear
it to the public, it will survive, whether
or not it pleases the reviewers. Further
more, it would be gracious of him to
admit that these critics have made a
study OF the drama that, by and large.
they are qualified for the positions they
hold. and that they write what they
believe to be honest words He will
find it difi1cult TO prove that they pan
for the sake of 'panning."
| Il 4
"Dr. Sirovich was not content" re-
marks the Spokane Spokesman Review,
Ito describe the critics as destructive.
He called them graduate DISORDERS Of
| prizefights and horse races which is
hostile language indeed. A dramatic
| critic Is a sensitive soul, living in the
| higher stratosphere of the intellect, and
should be treated with tact. No doubt
| some of the critics are glad to meet
| with the Patents Committee, as they
were asked to do. Although their skill
lies in manipulation of the written word,
| they must have a certain amount of
skill OF oral disputation, and welcome
the opportunity to be part of an all
star cast. They profess to love the
theater quite as ardently as any mem
Der Of Congress and consider themselves
the dramas preservers, not its destroy
ers. The war will probably turn out to
be q competition In saving the stage,