THE REPERTORY SOCIETY.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 55, Issue 300, 2 October 1935, Page 6

THE REPERTORY SOCIETY.

Sir, —I have, read with great interest some (and with disgust, one) the letters appearing in recent issues of your paper. I might add, without preamble, that I am an active member of the Society—one who has taken part m readings and a small part in an actual production. Ido not possess any great histrionic ability, but I support wholeheartedly the aims and objects of the Society, and offer my sincere congratulations on its splendid successes since its inception, for this reason', I have always been available for any! l , minor parts. •’ l oo not wish to criticise the letters wlncn have appeared, at any length, out wish more to point out a lew relevant tacts which seem to have been overlooked by the critics up, to uivte.

firstly, i commend Gab nolle M. xlarjnan on her eitort. it was a kindly, constructive criticism, ana as such no doubt noted by our committee, buck criticism is always welcome to an amateur society anu always acceptable. “Call Boy,’ 7 1 think, had half an hour to spare, and entered into it fox the fun of the thing. Humour does help in these dull days. “A Visitor,” 1 think, had a private grievance (shared by many) and a sincere one. We all realise that such expressions must be hurtful to some, and likewise the criticism is welcome and i hope will bear fruit. The quip re “Quaker love” is merely a matter ol opinion. “Laurel Hardy”—what a delightful and apt pen-name—synonymous with stuff and nonsense, slap-stick comedy —and being a slave to such he must select it as his choice of name. He appears (only appears) to be some disgruntled new-comer to,Ashburton who, on arrival in a provincial town, was going to show us how “and then some.” “Laurel Hardy,” anyone with a knowledge of psychology can road you like an open book. Enough at present—l will take “Laurel” oil separately if he so desires it. The Repertory Society are intent on the promotion of dramatic art, etc. (1 am nor sure of their actual aim and objects, but they will bo found in the book of rules). The results they have obtained have certainly justified their existence. Who would have said three years ago that such a flourishing state could be attained? “Discoveries” havo -been made. Men and women (should 1 say boys and girls) have been attracted to the Society, and with teaching, readings, etc., have developed into quite good amateurs and will develop further. Gabrielle M. Harman’s criticism stands and should be read again regarding the value and far-reaching effects of Repertory.

, The Society do not claim to have Clark Gables, George Arlisses, Diana Wynyards or Ann Hardings, and. they don’t want Laurel and Hardies. They have some splendid actons and actresses, for amateurs—we all know that, hut the committee wish to give all members a chance to show their worth; they cast them according to their ability to act. Sometimes they miss, not so much the fault of the casting committee or Society as perhaps the individual when he appears befoie the footlights. But the “discoveries far outnumber the failures. The study of plays, the readings, and the producing of some does have a real educational value. The committee knows that some of its members are lacking in pronunciation, expression in speech, deportment on the stage and stage presence, but improvement is aimed at and by such improvement to assist the individual in private meCritics of amateur productions must not overlook the high standard of work demanded. Comparison is always mado with professional productions heard on the stage, and more especially at the picture theatres. “Talkies” do help in many ways, but to set them as a standard (and many do) and compare productions by amateurs who are there lor self-improvement and pleasure is surely unfair. Again my congratulation to the ,Society and my best wishes for tli future. . . „ In conclusion, I note- “originality used in-“ Laurel Hardy’s” letter. Its very difficult, Laurel, to ever get even an original letter. I. have seen every word of your letter somewhere else before it was published m the Guaidian.” ONLOOKER. pg_ The criticism apropos the play written by a local resident is too contemptible for remark.

Sir Your correspondent “Cali Boy” has a rather mistaken idea of the people of the Far North. It may surprise him to learn that we arc British and, as such, are not at all concerned as to what Mussolini and the Italians maj think of the Commandments. We know that the laws and constitutions of 0111 uwn Empt'C are founded upon the. Commandments of God. “Call Boy” may not know this, but lie will, of course, leain all these things bye and bye, when lie grows up and is better able to see things in their right perspective My criticism of the love-making scene in “The Black Horseman” seems somewhat to annoy “Call Boy. Well, Sir, to the undeveloped mind such scenes would naturally appeal and, on that score, we must make excuses for our young friend; lie will doubtless outgrow it in the course of a few years. Many fine men have passed tliroug 1 I have read with interest the lettei written by your correspondent Gabnelle M. Harman, and confess that, as regards the performance of “The Black Horseman,” she lias exactly expressed mv sentiment. I think, too, she may he very near the mark when she says, “a refresher course in history is what the producers need.” In closing, allow me to offer my commiseration to the religious people or Ashburton in having such a champion as “Call Boy.” One has only to read his letter to see liow well, qualified lie must be to judge as to what constitutes Christian character and behaviour. • . A VISITOR.