Evening star., 1940-04-23


seasons ago, Sherwood demon
strates that war is his meat as
dramatist; that he can handle the
theme with the intelligence, coher-
ence and force which elude so many
playwrights. He and the Lunts may
well have earned exclusive rights to
the subject with their latest prof.
ect in spite of the circumstance that
its timeliness is a considerable asset
to the play in some of its wordier
areas.
There Shall Be No Night" pre-
sented by the Playwrights' Com
pany and the Theater Guild, gives
the Lunts less chance than any play
IN recent years to indulge their
lustrous comedy. They who could
make Chekhov's "Seagull" vagrant-
ly laughing matter, from coast to
coast, are concerned with far more
somber theme in Sherwoods an
alysis of mans latest and greatest
lunacy. Within the darker frame,
however, the acting still is that of
the Lunts, incomparably fine, and
beyond criticism in its aWareneSs
that these are grave days.
1t is idle and ungrateful to specu-
late what There Shall Be No Night"
might be like without the Lunts.
Its theme is man at war, which in
spires verbosity, its mood is neces-
sarily grim, and its thinking deeper
than that of the average play. But
let it be wordy. for where the mere
ly wordy dramatist simply knocks
the ears off the audience, Mr.. Sher-
wood touches the heart. The Lunts
are vastly valuable in seeing that
the touch is precisely right, and so
are the several members of the act
ing company which they have built
so carefully through the years.
Utilizing his right of free speech,
Sherwood has spoken freely in his
latest play to the effect that war is
mans major imbecility, although
not necessarily incurable one. SUBJ
ordinately, but with equal fervor, he
brings into play group of sturdy,
'unminced words to make his point
that whatever justice and justifica-
ton is to be found in the present
conflict in Europe is on the side of
the democracies. The effect of his
eloquence at last nights perform
ance was to create applause at mo-
ments when the play did not need
it nearly so much as the applauders
needed it to relieve their emotions.
The ravaging of Finland provides
the background of Sherwood's in
dictment of the totalitarian states
on the charge of degeneracy in its
most acute form.
The action Of the drama revolves
about the tragic fate of the family
of DR.. Kaarlo Valkonen, an humble,
devout and great neurologist whose
scientific work has earned him the
Nobel Prize. War is inconceivable
in this house of peace, and faith in
God and man. DR.. Valkonen Uunt)
knows the Russians and he does
not believe them to be warlike. His
wife miss Fontanne), +,
happy, the frivolous idol of her
family, has no room In her philos-
ophy for such tragedy. Their son,
at work on the Mannerheim Line
defenses a year before they are to
be used, looks upon the gesture OF
preparedness as one of dubious ne
cessity. Only the pessimistic old
uncle of the scientist views his world
so dourly as to see that Finland's
destruction is inevitable. Between
these two points of view among the
Valkonens stands Dave Corween, an
American journalist, who has spe-
cialized in writing the obituaries of
small states in period when the
among them is enormous.
He allows himself the wistful hope
that nothing will happen.
But the worst does happen, Of
course. Barbaric might wipes out
the greatness, the nobility of spirit,
the decency, and the hope of man
in the Valkonens-and
Corween (speaking for SherwooO
the saddest obituary in
his meteoric career of burying help
less states all the way from Man.
chukuo to Finland.
X X X X
The turn of events for Finland
and the Valkonens gives Sherwood
a chance to say some savage things
about the diseases OF dictators, but
into the mouth of the famous scien-
tist he puts words of hope. Their
substance is that on the part of the
at least, war has come
to be regarded as an evil, even If a
ppa ipctood of tho o1or1,