The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1933-11-14
BY NATHANIEL BUCHWALD


THE Daily Worker of Oct. Is,
printed a column by Harold
Elgar apparently intended as a re-
view of 1.-THE Third Parade" the cur
rent production Of the Jewish Work
ers' Theatre-Artef.
AS a review, Comrade Edgar's piece
is worthless. 1t tells nothing Of the
content of the play, its story, its
revolutionary message, its dramatic
qualities or faults, its characters. It
contains no specific reference to any
scene or any instance of characteri-
cation or direction to bear out his
sweeping statements. Even if these
general statements were correct, such
a review of a play could not be con-
sidered otherwise than inadequate.
But Comrade Elgar is apparently
concerned not SO much with review
ing the Artef production as with lay
ing down the law for all revolution
airy and workers theatres. This be-
comes a serious matter, tnasmuch as
Comrades Edgar's theses about the
revolutionary theatre and related
topics do not at all tally with the
principles commonly accepted in the
revolutionary theatre movement here
and abroad.
Comrade Edgar questions the ad-
visibility Of Jewish workers the
atre producing play in which nom
Jewish workers are portrayed. He
writes:
TN such play as THE Third
Parade" the workers are the laconic,
hard boiled, Open-road type Of
American born of the pioneer in
dustrialism of the West. This type
of worker is difficult for any but
an equivalent type of actor to sug-
gest, and the paIe-faced actors of
the Artef, more characteristic of
shop workers than of the heavy in
dustry workers the authors had in
mind, bring TO the play an element
SO foreign as to create a sense Of
unreality."
1.-THE sense of unreality" could not
have been created by the perform
ance of "The Third Parade" which
Is remarkable precisely for its
poignant dramatic reality both as 10
individual character portrayal and
ensemble effect. Rather it is the up
shot CT Comrade Edgar's precon-
ceived idea about "the pale-faced
actors of the Artef, more character
istic Of shop-workers than Of the
heavy industry workers the authors
had in mind"
Ccmrade Edgar sets out ito dis
cuss the shortcomings as well as the
qualities Of this group, for they will
be the shortcomings of other groups
who propose to present full length
revolutionary plays for workers audi
ences" and he lays down the law:
at should be part Of every work
ers' theatre program to do as much
as possible those plays which are
closest in their background to the
actors who will perform them and
the audiences which will see them"
And he proceeds to specify:
eff there are plays of American
Jewish workers, those are the plays
that the Arsef should give prefer
ence to and should encourage dra-
natists to write for them"
From a political standpoint this
thesis would be correct if it we're not
cne-sided. While workers theatres
are expected to deal with matters
that are of vital concern to their
audiences, they also are expected to
use the theatre as means Of broad
ening the revolutionary outlook of
their audiences, linking them with
problems of the class struggle out
side the given locality, outside the
given "pale-faced" or 'hard- boiled,
open road" national group. 1t is the
task of the revolutionary workers
theatre to integrate the forces OF
the working class as well as to treat
concretely Of local problems.
But Conlrade Edgar's theory be-
comes doubly false when he bases it
on artistic considerations, on the
principle that Jewish actors should