Evening star., 1938-02-13
WRITERS ON RELIEF
Subsidized Artist Weighs Work of w. P. A.
Project in Magazine, but She Is
the One Found Wanting.
By NC. r.

zine for February appears q
highly significant article on the
4 present governmental habit of
subsidizing writer's and artists who
are unable, by their own artistic ef-
forts, to make q living. The author
Of this piece Is unnamed Perhaps
she chooses anonymity because GER
tain implications of her account of
her experience as q Federal penman
might be considered critical OF the
subsidization theory. On the other
hand, it may be that her revelations
are something Of which she herself is
ashamed It may be that she makes
them now in spirit Of desperation,
but that she would be unwilling to
have the world at large know these
experiences as something which befell
her Is an individual. For they can
not. surely, be inducive to any con-
siderable self-esteem. Be that as it
may, her article deserves wide read
ing.
Its title Is What the w. p. A. Did
to Me-" 1t tells of young woman who
wished to be a writer and, before the
depression, had been able to earn q
living by various commercial jobs OF
the sort in which crude kind of writ
ing ability Is needed-such jobs as
ad copy writing. house organ editing
and publicity. She had also worked
as a newspaper reporter. All these
positions, however, she says she con-
sidered unsatisfactory because they
gave her no outlet for her creative
energy" And she adds that she was
SO indifferent to them that she either
quit or was fired with frequency. That
her employers had not hired her to
express her creative ability apparently
did not even occur to her. She had
been willing to take their money, but,
by her own admission, was quite in
different about the execution of the
work for which the money was paid.
That she was one Of the ones to be
dispensed with when hard times came
Is not. therefore, an absolutely bathing
mystery.
CHE does not 60 into this aspect Of
the matter. however, but relates
that by the time her money was gone
she had reason to believe that she
was a playwright in embryo and was
greatly anxious to try her hand at
dramatic writing. As she puts it,
Should I waste precious weeks hunt
ing for a job which was almost GER
tain to elude me, when there was such
a thing as home relief to be had?"
The answer apparently was mo and
q thousand times no." The young
woman did not act so foolishly. She
hunted no job at all. She applied for
home relief, got it, and settled down,
supported by the taxpayers, to give
her genius rein. She wrote her play
and an agent (not a producer) ac-
cepted it. She writes that he accepted
1t enthusiastically" 1t IS still un-
produced, however.
BY this time, the young woman re-
lates, the Federal art projects were
under way and, having for the mo-
ment satiated her creative urge. she
applied for work on one such under
taking. submitting her unproduced
play as her credential. She was taken
on, she tells us, to assist on a "play-
writing project" at which labor she
was paid 1886 the week.
From here on the story has a certain
dellrious quality, so that the reviewer
found herself obliged, in reading it, to
60 back and peruse paragraph after
paragraph the second time to make
sure that she was not misinterpreting
what was written. But no. There it was.
The young woman blandly tells that
she was assigned to write a play "on
American history" mice little topic.
that, by the way, and that the Gov
eminent was to have possession of
her work when finished in return for
the wage it had paid her during COM
position-which, If the Government
wants for some really good reason to
collect plays by untried writer's. would
seem to be fair enough to everybody,
except. Of course, the taxpayers, who
were not consulted anyway.
RUT hearken, if you will. The young
woman (artist) recounts that she
and her fellow pensioners found the
bargain unjust and, through the ORA
matists' Guild and other interested
parties" contested the arrangement.
The way they wanted it, in other
words. was that the Government
should just pay them. They would
write plays while living on the money,
but the plays would remain their own.
If. having written them on taxpayers
cash, they then wanted to market
them privately, why, that was to be
their privilege. Just what their wages
covered in service she does not specify.
She reports. however, that at this
time she went about with q beatific
expression" 50 certainly we must alb
solve her from any crudely material
motivation. She was Just drawing
her pay. That was her end of the
bargain. However, unkind lawmakers
refused to allow the contention of the
Dramatists' Guild and those inter
ested parties" and, as the guild would
mot hear" of the pensioners relin-
gushing for such modest salaries
anything ss potentially valuable as a
play" the playwriting project was
abolished.
It might have been lesson in half
4 loaf Is better than none" to a per-
son Of more substantial integrity. To
this young woman, however, it appar-
emily was . lesson in the notion that
If you can get little for almost
nothing you may probably get more
for even less So she simply trans
ferred to the Play Bureau of the Fed
eral Theater, which, as she remarks,
had been designed to meet just her
need" Nice going, that, if the re-
viewer may irreverently say so.
And look for q moment, please, at
the manner in which she describes
that same need" She says: "The
Government was in agreement
with the opinion that the only way
to rehabilitate . man Is to allow him
to work at His own craft. thus to re-