Evening star., 1943-04-28

American theater. In language Whi,
to the hopefully poetic, Mr.. Andel
constancy twice as unshakeable as "
essentially sound and conditions will
be likewise tomorrow morning.
This thought on Mr.. Anderson is
superinduced in this corner today
by Miss Gertrude Bromberg Miss
Bromberg as press representative of
the Playwrights' Company, and spe-
cifically, The Eve of st. Mark" is
paid to make people think of Mr..
Anderson, the more publicly the bet
ter. Miss Bromberg is very pleasant
about it and quite subtle. Where
the average abrupt press representa-
tive would offer his client as a col
umn- worthy subject on the eve of
a take-of for New York she merely
insinuates.
at is too bad you won't be here
10 do Sunday column on him" she
says. He Is so writeable, isn't hep"
X X X *
AS to an angle of approach to Mr..
Anderson's writeability, Miss B. knew
the proper one.
IT was talking the other day to
Blank" she said, about the best
musical comedy we ever saw. What
was your favorite?"
There was only one into which
any writing-you know, writing
ever went" we said. THAT was
Knickerbocker Holiday"
ME, too" said Miss Bromberg,
sand wasn't it funny that it was only
q fragile success? L thought it would
run forever"
That was enough for a starter
Miss Bromberg went away then and
left this correspondent to muse upon
the fact that Mr. Anderson would
have known-which this reviewer
did not knoW-that 'Knickerbocker
Holiday" would be only a fragile
success.
He would have known, for in
stance, that Indignation is rare
quality in musicals, that audiences
are not accustomed to it. He would
have known corralatively, that for
all the professed warnings for fresh
ness of viewpoint in the theater 1t
actually is wanted neither by the
majority of critics or customers. 1t
Is something every one talks about,
m front of the fireplace, over the
cocktail table, Or across the night
table. But, for all the talk, no one
really wants it and Mr. Anderson
probably knew that all the time.
He could have grown indignant
about that-and maybe have written
another satirical musical comedy
about theater-goers on whom his
Tonic book and Kurt Weill's mar
velously fresh and original musical
vas wasted-but his is not that kind
Of indignation.
That is one of the best things
about his indignation. 1t is quite
mpersonal, which is more than one
can say about the indignation of
great many people of the theater.
He could get angry over the Fascist
dke rule of Peter Stuyvesant, which
Is part of the political heritage of
the United States, but he could not
get angry that SO many missed his
point and merely thought how
preachy of him. And thought also,
perhaps, that Mr.. WELLS music was
done disservice by being inter
woven with one of the few intel
dgent books a musical comedy ever
has had.
Any one who wants to break down
the playWright's indignation, just
for the sake of argument, might un-
dertake to estimate just when it was
expressed most vehemently or force
fully.
This department. which is willing
10 start the argument and then run
for New York, would suggest Win
terset.' In that echo of the Sacco-
Vanzetti case. about which he had
written before in 1928 in Gods of
the Lightning, Mr.. Anderson was
as dangerous as a human could be,
yet managed to be more coherent
than he has been upon occasion