“MR PIM PASSES BY”

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26917, 1 November 1948, Page 6

“MR PIM PASSES BY”

Sir.—Having seen this play, and agreed heartily With your critics’ remarks ' (albeit surprised at his moderation in the circumstances) I have been .wondering how long it would be before the Repertory Society supplied authorities to step into the breach torn in its satisfaction. Mr Roland Watson is 'not convincing. By implying that your criticisms h<xve caused a dearth of male actors, which has .in turn caused mis-castinp.. he has m fact admitted the truth of your critics contentions. Tne play was miscast and badly so. Mr Watson indirectly agrees, but. he would have your critic sink his own feelings and write a “ splurge " so that the society w.ll not lose face. Free criticism is the life blood or a democracy, and when unwarranxed praise of the mediocre is asked gf us, even to protect the moguls of drama, it is high time we looked to our de.ences and show by indifference that the Repertory Society must either deliver the gvods or else. . . Anyone who “ walks the boards ’ must expect and accept criticism. Your report of “Mr Pim Passes By ” was a pale shadow of the robust damnation such a feeble show would have received from, say James Agate. X am myself a member of the society, bat one more “ dramatic opus ’’ of the measure of “Mr Pirn Passes By * will see ah immediate cancellation ofmy subscription. . . I would rather save the money for the next visit of the Old Vic ten years hence. . . I am, etc., “De Winter. Sir, —Your correspondent, Mr. Roland Watson, complains about the criticism of the above-mentioned play. Surely Mr Watson recognises that the Repertory Society should expect criticism The public pay—not toward charity—but toward the funds of an incorporated society which has now been in existence for some considerable time. It should have attained some degree of proficiency, which, if lacking, justifies adverse criticism However, it would seem that suen a play as that above-mentioned, is beyond Its ability. The atmosphere was not that of an English country house. Anything less “ country ” than some but not all of the supposed -characters of Norman Blood could scarcely be imagined. Moreover, it was not only the men who were at fault. , ... , . I know nothing of your critic, but, in good sooth, he dealt mercifully enough. The Dunedin Repertory Society should choose plays of a different type. Pla>s with more “ meat " as ltlc -£4®" gests, would seem more suitable. Then, if onlv a small percentage of the plays full value, is extracted, at least an effect would be achieved. In any case the society—metaphorically speaking—should gird up it's loins. I am, etc., Bob Acres.

Sir, —The criticism by your reporter of " Mr Pim Passes By ” has in some quarters called forth indignant P™>test. Mr Watson 'is not complimentary to the male actors. According to him, they cannot “take it” like the ladies. That is confession. As for criticism of amateur performances, there is another side to it. The Repertory Society charges for admission, and surely that should warrant criticism of their plays. When Mr C. NBayertz was editor of the Triad he would never accept complimentary tickets for any show.' whether amateur or professional. He said it left him with an open mind. He was a caustic, though capable, critic, and his criticism often raised storms of protest from players and their friends—mostly of amateur performances. He said to me once: " If I ask my grocer for a pound of butter and he gives me a pound of rancid fat I have a right to complain. So, accordingly, if I pay to see -a show, and if it does not give me value for my money, I have the .right to say so.” The argument that, because it is an amateur performance, criticism should be all honey is simply nonsense, and certainly not in the best interests of the players themselves or the play. Had your reporter said that the actors in question had given finished performances, and quite the equal of professional, it would doubtless have delighted ‘those concerned, but finished performers are not made like that. The only road is the hard road. In conclusion, I can only say to Mr Watson—whose own performances on the stage I have always admired—that if the members of the Repertory Society under discussion are so thin-skinned that they throw in the towel through adverse criticism, then they had better seek some, other hobby. So long as criticism is constructive, and not personal or ill-natured, it should jae accepted ih good faith—l am, etc., Fair Criticism.