Life, 1928-12-14 · page 15 of 48
Life — December 14, 1928 — page 15: what you’re looking at
What you’re looking at
This theatre review column discusses several stage productions. The visible cartoon shows a reclining figure and what appears to be a small cherub or child figure—likely illustrating a theatrical scene or joke, though the specific reference is unclear from the image alone. The text reviews "Old Wine" by Robert Benchley, discussing theatrical revivals. It mentions productions of "Macbeth" and "The Wild Duck," critiquing their quality and performances. The column also covers "Redemption" (a Lebende Leichnam adaptation) and "The Royal Box." Notable is the discussion of Florence Reed in "Lady Macbeth" and commentary on how these classic plays still require talented actors to succeed. The tone is witty and somewhat dismissive of mediocre productions, typical of Life's satirical theatre criticism.
📄 Transcribed text from this page (OCR, searchable)
Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.
A plague of revivals usu- ally descends when the theatres are empty of other attractions, but this season, Benchley cock-eyed to the last, has brought forth a whole week of them right in the middle of its busiest activity in other lines. It would serve them right if we passed over them entirely for bother- ing us when we had so much else to think of, but it so happens that one or two of the revivals are better than most of the new shows on the list. “The Wild Duck,” for example. It is unfair to look for anything as good as “The Wild Duck” in any season, for the chances are that it won't be written, We do not intend to make this department any more ridiculous than it already is by | praising this play of Ibsen's with the fervor of a pioneer, Everyone who has ever seen “The Wild Duck” must have gone away with a bruise between the eyes where it hit him. It is the only play we have ever seen, or expect to see, where Comedy and Tragedy are fused into the same moment, where we laugh at Ekdal as he sits at the table compromising with his coffee and, at the same time, dread to hear the sound from the imitation hunt- ing-preserve outside which will mean that little Hedvig has taken the expert's advice and shot “against the grain of the feathers.” That fifth act of “The Wild Duck” is an act in a million (and we have seen only a few thousand acts) and, on seeing it tor the third time the other evening, we again had to be asked to leave. b= Tut Actors’ THeatre is the organiza- tion which has given it to us in revival, as it did several years ago, and Blanche Yurka still plays Gina, which is as it should be, There is a new Hedvig, Miss Linda Watkins, and we doubt that a bet- ter one could have been found. The entire cast, as a matter of fact, including Dallas Anderson, Ralph Roeder and Jokn Daly Murphy, help to make this revival a standard at which all the new dramas may aim, if they like, but with scant hope of success. Anoruer good play which has stood the test of time theatrically better than most of those by the same author is “Macbeth.” This will always be good melodrama, and, next to “Hamlet,” the best thing of Shakespeare’s to sce unless you happen | to be a member of a high-school English class which Aas to see them all. The pres- ent production (now on the road) has the added advantage of scenery inspired, if not actually designed, by Gordon Craig (according to a frantic exchange of let- ters in the daily press, Douglas Ross seems to be responsible for the actual production), and, while there is a ple- thora of aimless stairways leading no- where, apparently designed for mes- | sengers to fall down, the whole effect is retty impressive. | Florence Reed makes Lady Macbeth we generally think of Scotch dames as be- gone to Helen Menken’s white-wash pot to the extent of resembling an equestrienne in the Barnum and Bailey living-picture all goes toward making “*Macbeth” a little more stimulating to the eye than hereto- fore. Lyn Harding’s Macbeth is suff- ciently dumb and heavy to uphold the best Scotch tradition. | 'AnorHer revival which was in New York for only a few weeks and which is now on tour for the benefit of our out- of-town readers is “Redemption” (ge- “The Living Corpse”). This is acted in German by the famous Moissi with an ex- | cellent cast of his countrymen and women. | Even if you do not understand German it is worth seeing, for the program will tell you all about the comparatively simple story and you will hear the rich voice of Moissi (why is it that the best stage voices aially seem to be the result of a slight head-cold?) and will undoubtedly be as depressed as Tolstoy intended you to be at the outcome of it all. Herr Moissi does not make Fedja quite so dashing a wreck as that of John Barry- more in the “Redemption” of old, but, for that reason, his degeneration is all the more pathetic. He is just a nice guy gone just a bit more physically attractive than | ing, and, in the sleep-walking scene, has | groups (without the white horse), but it | Soren “Der Lebende Leichnam,” alias | wrong and one understands him better. We were not so crazy about Reinhardt’s lighting. One scene in particular was so effectively lighted that all you could see was the fohts, just as in some of Gordon Craig's scenes all you can see is the stairs. This modern design is effective in many ways, but, after “ih so long as actors are going to be on the stage at all, they might as well be seen. yp = = In “The Royal Box” the theatre-going public has a chance to see Walker White- side in white-face for the first time since he went Hindu, and, in tribute to his protean powers, we would never have Keown him as the suave Oriental who has for so long been balking the English and salving the ladies. Since “The Royal Box” |is Charles Coghlan's old comedy, adapted from Alexandre Dumas’ play, “Kean,” and since James Clarence 1s supposed to be an actor of the Georgian period, we suppose that the rich ham quality in Mr. Whiteside’s performance was legitimate. But we have a feeling that Mr. Whiteside loved it. Certainly he omitted nothing to make it genuine and, aside from Mr. Rob- ert Halliday in “The New Moon,” it is as good a muscum-piece of the old school jas can be found in town, The play, with its landladies rushing in and out and its Princes of Wales and ac- companying gentlemen swinging long sticks under their cloaks, is a veritable actors’ delight, and we cannot grudge them its revival. Arter waking up those subscribers who had fallen asleep at ‘Faust’ and forgot- ten to go home, the Theatre Guild played good and safe and revived Shaw’s “Major Barbara” for its second bill. Very few | people will fall asleep at “Major Barbara,” although there may be stretches when its | message sounds a fittle obvious, owing to | its having been taken up by the best peo- | ple since Shaw wrote it. Between wars the st people are always amenable to Shaw. It is only when a good war is in the offing that it teasnis bad form to agree with him. Anybody can enjoy “Major Barbara” now, and not lose caste. | The Confidential Guide to current plays will be found on page 30. comicbooks.com